ISLAMABAD (Agencies): The Chairman of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has challenged the rejection of nine bail pleas in the Islamabad High Court (IHC).
According to the details, after the bail plea rejection in several cases including May 09 riots, judicial complex attack and fake accounts, the Chairman of PTI has filed nine applications through his lawyer Salman Safdar in the Islamabad High Court. The Sessions Court rejected six, while three bail application was rejected by the Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC). In the petitions submitted to IHC, the PTI lawyer requested that the bail reject verdict should be be declared null and void.
The lawyer further calls upon the IHC to instruct the trial courts to hear the cases again based on merit and prevent the police from making arrests of PTI chairman in these nine cases. Earlier to this, Chairman Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) approached the Supreme Court against Islamabad High Court (IHC) Chief Justice Aamer Farooq.
A petition has been filed on behalf of the PTI Chairman by Latif Khosa in the apex court under Article 186-A today. “My cases should be transferred to the Lahore or Peshawar high courts from the Islamabad High Court (IHC),” petitioner pleaded.
Petitioner also sought restraining IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq from hearing the cases against him. The PTI Core Committee had yesterday announced that it would approach the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) for a reference against Justice Aamer Farooq. Qureshi challenges physical remand in IHC: PTI leader Shah Mahmood Qureshi has challenged his physical remand in the Islamabad High Court. Former foreign minister has filed a petition against physical remand granted by a special court to the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) in a case pertaining to a diplomatic cipher that reportedly went missing from the PTI’s ex-prime minister.
Shah Mahmood Qureshi has pleaded to the court to declare the trial court’s August 20, 21 and 25 decision as void. He pleaded to the high court to send him on judicial remand after declaring the physical remand decision as void. “With malicious intent and connivance of the federal government the case has been against me. I didn’t receive the cipher telegram, neither shared its transcript with a person,” he pleaded.
