Court rejects
ISLAMABAD: In the Toshakhana criminal case, the additional district and sessions judge dismissed the no-confidence motion filed by the PTI chairman against him.
However, the judge granted Imran Khan’s request for exemption from appearing in court today. The suspect and witnesses have been summoned to appear on July 20, with Imran Khan being summoned in his personal capacity.
The court adjourned further proceedings until July 20.
Glimpses of expensive Toshakhana gifts.
During the proceedings, the court expressed concerns about the social media campaign surrounding the case. Additional District and Sessions Judge Humayun Dilawar stated that he had recorded his concerns on the matter.
The judge informed Gohar Ali Khan that an observation had been made about him in the decision, and if the high court deemed it necessary, it could take appropriate action.
Previously, Imran Khan, the chairman of PTI, had expressed his lack of confidence in the judge presiding over the Toshakhana criminal case.
In court, Imran Khan’s lawyer presented alleged Facebook posts by the judge, while Amjad Pervaiz, the lawyer representing the election commission, opposed the no-confidence motion against the judge.
Judge Humayun Dilawar expressed his displeasure, clarifying that the Facebook account in question belonged to him but the posts were not made by him. He suggested that the petitioner’s lawyers should have requested a judicial inquiry rather than resorting to trolling tactics like the PTI.
The District and Sessions Court, responsible for hearing the Toshakhana criminal case against PTI Chairman Imran Khan, reserved its decision on both of his petitions: the no-confidence motion against Judge Humayun Dilawar and the plea for exemption.
Imran’s lawyer, Gohar Ali Khan, presented the judge’s Facebook posts in court, expressing sadness upon seeing them.
Judge Dilawar questioned whether a judicial inquiry should be conducted and if a forensic examination of the posts was necessary.
He confirmed that the Facebook account belonged to him but reiterated that the posts shown in court were not his own. He advised the lawyer to initiate a judicial inquiry or approach the Supreme Court.
Barrister Gohar stated his hope for the court to reject the posts, emphasizing that it is not appropriate for the court to conduct a trial based on social media content.
He noted that the posts in question are still accessible on Facebook and emphasized the importance of fair trial and human rights for every individual.
Amjad Pervaiz, the lawyer representing the election commission, mentioned that the suspect had already applied for a transfer of the case, as the PTI chairman no longer had faith in the current court.
He criticized the suspect’s attitude, highlighting the months of absconding from court and the failure to sign the exemption plea. The Islamabad High Court had granted a stay to the suspect for one and a half months.
The ECP counsel claimed that the PTI chairman’s behavior towards the court lacked seriousness, asserting that there would be no escape from the case. Amjad Pervaiz objected to the motion of no-confidence against the judge. He said that it was inappropriate to tarnish the court’s reputation without an affidavit. He further commented on PTI’s tendency to campaign on social media.
Judge Dilawar acknowledged that Imran Khan’s counsel had presented his posts in the courtroom, suggesting that the lawyer could have requested a judicial inquiry into the matter.
