LHC hears pleas against new Model Town JIT

Counsel says ATC recording statements after framing of charges


Our Correspondent October 22, 2021
Pakistan Awami Tehreek takes out a rally in Rawalpindi against the Model Town tragedy, on June 17, 2021. SCREENGRAB

print-news
LAHORE:

A seven-judge Lahore High Court bench headed by Chief Justice Muhammad Ameer Bhatti will continue hearing arguments on Friday on maintainability of petitions challenging the formation of the second joint investigation team (JIT) in the Model Town police firing case.

Petitioner police officials Rizwan Qadir Hashmi and Khurram Rafique had challenged the formation of a JIT for the second time. As the proceedings commenced on Thursday, the petitioner’s counsel Azam Nazir Tarar contended that the only interest of the government to form the second JIT was that there were some people of the opposition in the list of the accused.

He said the matter was already pending in an anti-terrorism court, where the statements of the witnesses were being recorded after framing of charges. However, an application has been submitted for re-investigation of the matter at this stage.

Read PM Imran orders removal of police officials 'involved' in Model Town killings

Senior Puisne Judge Malik Shahzad Ahmad Khan remarked during the arguments that there was no fair investigation against a person who was in power. He said both lawyers Azam Nazir Tatar and Ali Zafar were part of parliament. Tarar replied that they had discussed the matter.

He argued that the ATC was hearing the case on a daily basis but the complainant’s counsel had informed the court that he could not participate in daily hearings.  He implored the court that a matter could not be investigated the second time. Chief Justice Bhatti asked Tarar if he would present more grounds for his contention and adjourned the hearing for a day.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 22nd, 2021.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ