ISLAMABAD - The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday directed the district administration of Islamabad to ensure security arrangements during the appearance of PTI chairman Imran Khan on April 18.
The circular issued by the registrar’s office said that the bail petitions of former prime minister Imran Khan in eight FIR would be heard at 2:30 pm tomorrow in courtroom No.1.
The entry of journalists and lawyers in courtroom No. 1 would be permitted through special passes. However, the court staff would be exempted from the passes.
The circular said that Imran Khan would be allowed to take 15 lawyers along with him in the courtroom and ten lawyers would be allowed from the offices of the attorney general of Pakistan and advocate general.
It further said that 30 members of the Islamabad High Court Journalists Association (IHCJA) would be allowed to enter.
It may be mentioned here that a two-judge bench comprising Chief Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Mian Gul Hassan Aurangzeb would take up the pre-arrest bail petitions of Imran Khan in eight FIRs with regard to the riot and vandalizing the public property at the judicial complex Islamabad.
IHC RESERVES VERDICT ON SHIBLI FARAZ’S PETITION
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday reserved its judgment on a petition seeking the provision of FIRs details and stopping the police from arresting PTI leader Shibli Faraz.
Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir reserved the verdict after hearing arguments from the respondents. The state counsel informed the court that the details related to Ali Amin Gandapur, Azam Khan Swati and Murad Saeed had already been provided. He said that 18 cases were registered against Ali Amin Gandapur while eight against Murad Saeed in various police stations. He said that the petition of Azam Swati had been disposed off by the court.
Dr Baber Awan said that the defence was not provided with the details regarding Shibli Faraz. He prayed to the court to stop the police from arresting him until the information was shared. He said that the arrest of Shibli Faraz should be conditional on the approval of the court.
The court remarked that it had to view whether it could stop the arrest of the accused. The court reserved the judgment after hearing the argument.
