ISLAMABAD    -     The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Monday granted in­terim bail to Imran Khan Chairman Pakistan Teh­rik-e-Insaf (PTI) in seven different cases registered against him.

A two-member bench of IHC comprising Chief Justice of IHC Justice Aamer Farooq and Jus­tice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb conducted hearing of Khan’s peti­tion and barred the po­lice from arresting him.

The IHC bench also is­sued notices to the fed­eral government for withdrawing Khan’s se­curity as former prime minister while saying that Imran Khan’s secu­rity concerns are gen­uine and directed the respondents to submit response in this matter till April 6.

At one stage, Khan came to the court ros­trum saying that he wants to say something. However, the court stopped him to speak. The bench said that he is a respectable person but be sit on his seat.

The PTI chairman moved seven separate petitions seeking in­terim bail in the cases registered against him at Golra, Bara Kahu, Ramna, Khanna, and CTD police stations fol­lowing clashes at the Federal Judicial Com­plex (FJC) on March 18 when the former prime minister had appeared in the Toshakhana case.

Khan also filed an application quoting the statement of federal interior minister Rana Sanaullah Khan and requested the court to refrain the respondents from their “nefarious design to take the life of the petitioner and be restrained from arresting the petitioner in order to fulfil their plan in order to meet the end of justice.” He filed the petitions through Barrister Salman Safdar, Faisal Fareed, Intazar Hussain Panjutha and others saying that Khan would suffer “irreparable loss” if he was arrested.

During the hearing, the IHC Chief Justice asked that why the pe­titioner was trying to bypass the trial courts. At this, Khan’s coun­sel said that the former prime minister was facing security threats. Justice Farooq remarked that law and order situations arose when thousands of people gathered outside courts. Imran’s lawyer ar­gued that people came to the court on their own and were not asked by the PTI. He continued that on March 18, they were at the judicial complex but were not allowed to enter. The judge re­marked that the events that occurred on March 18 were wrong, and the court was aware that Imran faced potential threats.

Advocate General (AG) Islamabad Jahangir Jadoon said that the PTI must cooperate with security authorities. He said that on March 18, the former ruling party brought four to five thou­sand people and the door of the judicial complex was broken. AG Jadoon maintained that it was the PTI’s responsibility to control their followers. Then, Justice Farooq asked that what the party was to do when the authorities were not providing them with security. He remarked that Imran Khan has genuine security concerns and he had been attacked in the past as well.

Khan’s counsel stated that in all the cases against him, the po­lice were the plaintiff. He continued that he had no objections to going to the judicial complex if proper security was provid­ed. Barrister Safdar informed the court that Imran did not go to the trial court due to “security risks”. The IHC Chief Justice asked that why did you come to the Islamabad High Court after bypassing the trial court? He further said that you have to main­tain the law and order situation. At this, the IHC bench called Is­lamabad Advocate General to the rostrum and Justice Aurang­zeb said that the court told the chief commissioner many times to provide security [to Imran].

The AG responded that the trial court was shifted from the F-8 katcheri to the Judicial Complex and the former prime minister did not come out of his car at the court and his party workers lit cars on fire. The bench remarked that the security of each citi­zen is the state’s responsibility and the state should do its work and assure protection. The IHC chief justice said that you do not provide security then what else would they do?