Local court admits plea against TV anchor
Islamabad – A local court on Thursday admitted a petition of Khurram Shahzad, former fighter pilot of Pakistan Air Force, against his former wife Muniba Mazari for blaming him for all her afflictions.
Additional District and Sessions Judge Jehangir Khan admitted the petition for regular hearing and issued notices to Muniba, Chairman PEMRA and Chairman PTA in the matter. Khurram filed the suit against Muniba for her libellous statements viral on the internet.
The court also directed the respondents to submit their replies and deferred the hearing till January 11.
Rana Abdul Qayyum Advocate, counsel for the petitioner, told The Nation that besides issuing the notices, the court also directed Muniba to restrain from issuing any defaming statement against the plaintiff.
In response to the case, Muniba Mazari wrote on his twitter account that she had learnt about the case but had not yet received formal court notice.
Khurram submitted in the court that it was in 2008 when both the plaintiff and the defendant were travelling from Quetta to their hometown when suddenly a donkey cart appeared on road from right side near Jacobabad and they met an accident in which the defendant had serious injuries.
He continued that he opted for the best medical facility for the defendant at Aga Khan Hospital, Karachi. Due to the severity of spinal cord injury, unfortunately, the defendant could not completely recover, rendering her wheelchair bound for the rest of her life.
“After recovering from this trauma, the plaintiff and the defendant were upset because of not having any child. In the opinion of concerned doctors, the defendant could give birth to a baby but it was agreed mutually to go for adoption. In order to strengthen their relation, they adopted a baby boy on April, 12 2011 when he was only four-day old and looked after him like their real son,” said Khurram.
Khurram said that later the defendant started visiting foreigners with her brothers. Similarly, the defendant developed interest in modelling, which was against moral, religious and social values and against the customs of the plaintiff’s family.
The plaintiff added that nowadays, during her shows on different forums (national and international), the defendant talked wrongly about him and defamed him. “Due to these defamatory remarks, the plaintiff’s reputation is at stake.