- Shahbaz Gill’s lawyer requests Islamabad court to issue verdict on bail plea today.
- Hearing on bail plea to resume at shortly.
- Court orders IO to appear with record upon resumption of hearing.
An Islamabad court on Monday sought arguments on the bail plea of senior PTI leader Shahbaz Gill in a sedition case filed against him.
Gill was arrested last Tuesday afternoon from Banigala Chowk in the capital a day after making controversial remarks on a private TV channel. He was subsequently booked on charges of sedition and inciting members of state institutions against the Pakistan Army.
A treason case was registered against him at the Kohsar Police Station under several sections of the Pakistan Penal Code, including 124-A (sedition), 131 (abetting mutiny, or attempting to seduce a soldier, sailor or airman from his duty), 153 (wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot if rioting be committed; if not committed), 153-A (promoting enmity between different groups, etc), and 505 (statements conducing to public mischief), 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation), among others.
During Monday’s proceedings, Gill’s lawyer Faisal Chaudhry appeared in the court of an additional district and sessions judge, who was hearing the accused leader’s bail plea.
Chaudhry requested the court to issue a verdict on the plea today (Monday), maintaining that his arguments are ready.
At this, the judge remarked that a similar case is under trial in the Islamabad High Court as well.
Responding to the remark, Faisal maintained that the matter under trial in the IHC is related to the order of the judicial magistrate and, therefore, this court can hear the case regardless of the case in the high court.
“It is a declared law that no one can be kept in jail for a single minute without reason,” he contended, adding that the government wants to delay this matter on purpose.
At this, the court directed the investigation officer to appear in court with records at 11am, ordered the lawyer to submit a power of attorney on Gill’s behalf, and sought arguments from the parties upon resumption of the hearing at 11am.
Meanwhile, the prosecution has requested the court to keep the case adjourned.