CJP Bandial says there are errors in trial court’s Toshakhana judgment

Islamabad: Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Justice Umar Ata Bandial has remarked prima facie it appears there are errors in the trial court’s decision in the Toshakhana case on Wednesday.

CJP Bandial expressed these observations during the hearing of PTI Chairman Imran Khan’s petition against the Aug 3 Islamabad High Court (IHC) order of remanding the Toshakhana case to Additional Sessions Judge Humayun Dilawar who handed down three-year term to Imran Khan in the case.

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Bandial and comprising Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhel heard the case on Wednesday.

PTI chairman’s lawyer Latif Khosa appeared in the court and presented his arguments.

Moreover, he said that six MNAs sent the reference against the PTI chairman in which they accused the latter of submitting a false declaration. Then the lawmakers sent this reference to the speaker who forwarded this reference to the Election Commission of Pakistan.

Khosa said that Imran Khan got elected from the Mianwali National Assembly seat in 2018 elections. According to the ECP Act, every member is supposed to submit details of his and his family members’ properties till Dec 31 of every year.

He claimed that under the legislation, the ECP has 120 days to take legal action against the source of false information.

Advocate Khosa responded to Justice Naqvi's question about whether a member of the National Assembly could send a reference against a fellow legislator that no lawmaker could do so and that the ECP could only act within a certain amount of time.

Justice Mandokhel remarked that the current case is not about whether the reference could be sent against the PTI chairman, rather you (PTI lawyer) have come to the court against the Islamabad High Court decision.

The judge said that the Toshakhana main case has been decided, has the PTI chief challenged it.

Chief Justice Bandial remarked that the PTI has challenged the matter of court jurisdiction. “Now you yourself are saying that the case is sub judice in another court.

Justice Mandokhel questioned the PTI attorney about whether the outcome of the primary case would be influenced if the SC heard this matter. The trial court has already made its judgement if the SC accepts your appeal. The judge enquired as to where this matter would go.

The PTI chairman has not contested the case's legal standing, Justice Naqvi said.

They have also contested the case's legal standing, Khosa added. 

According to Justice Mandokhel, his argument is against the Islamabad High Court's ruling and not the complaint's legal position. He claimed that since the trial court had concluded the matter, it was not possible to remand it at this time.

Khosa said that the court should reverse the hands of the clock at the earlier position.