LAHORE – Additional District and Sessions Judge Nisar Ahmed on Monday granted bail to Malik Ishaq, the chief of banned outfit Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ), in a case registered against him for fanning sectarianism.
Earlier, Ishaq was sent to the Kot Lakhpat Jail on a 14 day judicial remand on his return from Saudi Arabia on August 29. Nishtar Colony Police had arrested him on the charges of delivering a provocative speech against Shias during a rally held in Lahore on August 9 after registering a case under section 295-A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs) of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) and Section 3 of the Amplifier Act.
Ishaq’s counsel Advocate Arif Mehmood Rana argued on Monday that Section 295-A of the PPC did not apply in this case and it was a mala fide intention on part of the police to register the case. He argued that to nominate his client according to 295-A, a prior permission of the central or provincial government was required.
While quoting Section 196 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), the counsel added that police did not bother to get this permission and neither the provincial or the federal government was a complainant in the case. He said Malik Ishaq was innocent and was willing to join investigation. He also implored the court to grant bail to his client.
The court heard the arguments and granted bail to Ishaq against surety bonds of Rs500,000. The court has directed the accused to submit surety bonds in a trial court . Ishaq could not be released from Kot Lakhpat Jail on Monday because of some unknown reasons.
KALABAGH DAM: The LHC has been urged through a writ petition to direct Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif to write a complaint letter to the Council of Common Interests (CCI) in accordance with Article 155 (1) of the Constitution regarding the construction of Kalabagh Dam (KBD).
Former World Bank and United Nations Chief Technical Adviser Bashir A Malik filed the petition through Barrister Mian Belal Ahmad, stating that the KBD’s construction would equally benefit all the provinces.
Quoting Article 155 (1), the petitioner said the federal government or the provincial government concerned might make a complaint in writing to the CCI if the interests of a province, the federal capital or the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata), or any of the inhabitants thereof, in water from any natural source of supply (or reservoir) have been or are likely to be affected prejudicially by: any executive act or legislation taken or passed or proposed to be taken or passed, or the failure of any authority to exercise any of its powers with respect to the use and distribution or control of water from that source.
He stated that the Water and Power Development Authority (Wapda) had admitted before the court that KBD was the only way to solve the energy crises in the country, therefore, it should be immediately constructed. Quoting Wapda’s stance, the petitioner pointed out that politicians were misguided on the issue.
He requested the court to direct the Punjab chief minister to make a written complaint in accordance with Article 155 to the CCI for not constructing KBD. The petitioner also requested that the failure on part of Punjab chief minister to exercise his discretion or power might be declared as illegal and unlawful.
POLIO DROPS: The Punjab Health Department has challenged a LHC decision about securing a certificate from parents after administering polio drops to their children. The department has challenged the LHC decision in the Supreme Court’s Lahore Registry.
The petitioner-department said during the anti-polio campaign, polio drops would be administered to almost 10.5 million children and the LHC order could not be implemented because it was impossible to secure certificates from parents of such a large number of children.
The Health Department said the anti-polio campaign was being affected because of the LHC order. The department requested the court to set aside the order and suspend it until the final disposal of the case as an interim relief.