Bring Imran Khan within an hour, orders CJP Bandial

ISLAMBAD (Mudasser Chuhdary) – The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Thursday ordered that PTI chairman Imran Khan should be produced in court within an hour. The directives come after Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Umar Ata Bandial termed the PTI leader’s arrest from the premises of Islamabad High Court (IHC) as a mighty disgrace to the country’s judicial establishment.

He remarked that the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) had committed contempt by violating court sanctity while arresting PTI chief Imran Khan.

A three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, is hearing the case while PTI lawyers are present in court. The PTI has challenged a verdict of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) declaring the arrest of party chief Imran Khan “lawful”. The PTI argued that the arrest of Imran Khan was illegal and sought his immediate release.

Thursday’s hearing 

At the outset of the hearing, PTI lawyer Hamid Khan told the bench that the ex-premier had reached the Islamabad High Court for biometric verification to file a petition for his pre-arrest bail. He said Imran Khan was taken into custody when he was undergoing the biometric process. “Why he was arrested when he was going to surrender to the court?” he questioned, adding that the former premier was also mishandled during the episode.

CJP Bandial remarked as per the high court’s record, a petition of Mr Khan had been filed but it was yet to be fixed for hearing. At which, the lawyer said biometric verification was compulsory for filing the petition.

Later, the chief justice remarked that the NAB had disgraced the judiciary by making the arrest on the premises of the high court.

At one point, Justice Athar Minallah said Mr Khan should not have been arrested when he was going to surrender. “It was better if NAB would have got permission from high court’s registrar to arrest him”.

When Justice Minallah asked the PTI lawyer what he wanted from the court, Hamid Khan pleaded the bench to issue an order for the release of Imran Khan.

While stressing the respect of courts, the CJP recalled that once NAB had arrested a suspect from the apex court’s parking and it was reversed with a surety from the anti-graft watchdog that it would not make any arrest on court premises.

After hearing the arguments, the chief justice ordered the authorities to produce the former premier before the court within one hour.

At the outset of the hearing, former premier’s lawyer Hamid Khan informed the court that Imran Khan had come to IHC in order to secure an extension in his interim bail. When the PTI chief was getting his verification done, Rangers personnel broke into the room.

“Rangers misbehaved with Imran Khan and arrested him,” he added.

At this, CJP Bandial inquired about the case in which Imran Khan was seeking the bail extension.

On this point, Justice Athar Minallah inquired if a plea can be filed before the bio-metric verification is conducted.

At this, the lawyer said that Imran Khan went for bio-metric verification because a plea cannot be filed before that.

“Why did NAB take the law in its hand? It would have been better for NAB to seek permission from IHC registrar,” Justice Minallah asked.

He said that every citizen has the right to get justice and the apex court had to ensure its provision. The judge also regretted the current situation in the country.

“Where did the sanctity of the court go with the arrest from the court premises,” CJP Bandial remarked.

Meanwhile, the CJP asked the number of personnel who arrested Imran Khan.

At this, Imran Khan’s lawyer Salman Safdar informed the court that 80-100 men were there to arrest the PTI chief.

“What was left of the honour of the court when 90 people entered the court premises. NAB has disrespected the court,” CJP Bandial said, adding that no one would feel safe inside a court anymore.

“No one can be arrested from the high court, Supreme Court or accountability court. Imran Khan’s arrest violated the judicial sanctity,” he added.

Meanwhile, Justice Minallah remarked that no one would come to the court if such arrests are made a norm.

“A person who has surrendered before a court cannot be arrested,” he added.

CJP Bandial then remarked that the court will review the legality of the NAB warrant and compliance on it.

“The right to surrender before the court cannot be sabotaged,” CJP added.

Meanwhile, Safdar informed the court that Imran Khan is on the “target list of terrorists” and his security was withdrawn. He also informed the court that NAB’s investigation officer wasn’t present at the time of arrest.

“There is no example of the way in which rangers arrested Imran Khan,” said Safdar.

At this, Justice Minallah remarked that the anti-graft watchdog had been doing the same with different people for years.

Khan’s lawyer Safdar then told the bench that they got to know after the arrest that the warrants were issued on May 1. He added that interior secretary informed the court the PTI chief had not received the warrant.

When asked what did the complainant seek, lawyer Hamid Khan requested the apex court to order Imran Khan’s release.

“Illegal work cannot be ignored,” CJP Bandial remarked, adding access to justice is the right of every citizen.

Meanwhile, lawyer Hamid Khan maintained that Imran Khan was not accompanied by any activist or a party supporter on May 9.

At this point, Justice Mazhar inquired if Imran Khan had responded to NAB notices.

Replying to the query, the PTI chief’s lawyer said that a response had been sent to NAB.

He contended that a person cannot be arrested during an inquiry and NAB was bound to notify the accused upon completion of inquiry.

When asked if Imran Khan joined the investigations, his other lawyer Shoaib Shaheen said that they were about to send a response.

“NAB’s arrest warrant is illegal,” he contended.

At this, Justice Mazhar remarked that the case was on the compliance on NAB’s arrest warrant, not of the legality of the warrant. He also asked why the PTI chief had not challenged warrant and become part of the investigations.

Meanwhile, Justice Minallah remarked that NAB only wanted to make others follow the law but “it was evident that Imran Khan had also not complied to the NAB’s notice”.

Meanwhile, Justice Mazhar remarked that Imran Khan sent a respond to NAB in May for the notice he received in march.

At this, the lawyer said that Imran Khan received only one notice.

“Justice Mazhar is talking about the implementation of law,” Justice Minallah remarked. He further asked if NAB had sought the registrar high court’s permission for the arrest.

NAB Prosecutor General Asghar Haider responded that the watchdog sought the interior ministry’s help for the implementation of the arrest warrant.

“Did the interior ministry implement the arrest warrant in the court premises?” asked Justice Minallah.

At this, the NAB official maintained that the implementation on the NAB warrant was done while taking the ministry on board.

“NAB has not learned its lesson in many years. There are many allegations against NAB including political engineering,” Justice Minallah remarked, adding that the watchdog has destroyed the country.

At this, NAB lawyer Sardar Muzaffar said that the court should also see Imran Khan’s conduct as he had showed resistance in the past.

CJP Bandial remarked that as per NAB the federal government had decided the procedure of compliance.

“Was any NAB officer present at the time of arrest,” he asked.

However, the NAB officials failed to respond to this question.

Haider maintained that he wasn’t aware of all the facts as he had just been appointed. He said that even a private person can also execute warrant.

At this, Justice Minallah remarked that NAB itself continues to execute its warrant.

Meanwhile, CJP Bandial remarked that the warrant was issued on May 1 while the arrest was made on May 9.

“Why did NAB not try to make the arrest for eight days. Did NAB want to arrest Imran Khan from the court,” the top judge asked. He also asked that why the letter was written to the interior ministry on May 8.

Meanwhile, Justice Minallah inquired how many notices did Imran Khan receive.

At this, NAB prosecutor said that only one notice had been sent to Imran Khan.

“It seems, NAB’s warrant was not in accordance with the law,” Justice Minallah observed. He asked if an attempt had been made for the arrest after the warrant was issued.

“Imran Khan was in Lahore, why didn’t NAB ask the Punjab government for the execution of warrant,” he asked.

The PTI had filed a petition in the Supreme Court a day earlier challenging the Islamabad High Court’s (IHC) decision calling party chief Imran Khan’s arrest by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) “legal”.

Initially, the petition was returned to the PTI after registrar’s office attached objections to the plea.

The registrar’s office stated that the PTI chief did not approach the relevant forum, adding that he could file an intra-court appeal.

It further stated that the petition did not have the signatures of the PTI chief.