LHC orders CCPO to release PTI workers after undertaking

Court was hearing recovery of six people including Senator Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhary

Our Correspondent May 26, 2022


Lahore High Court Chief Justice Muhammad Ameer Bhatti has directed the CCPO Lahore to release those, after taking their undertaking, detained in connection with the joining the long march by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf.

The CJ Bhatti was hearing a petition seeking the recovery of six people including Senator Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhary who had been kept in alleged illegal detention by the Punjab police. As proceedings commenced, the petitioner’s counsel advocate Azhar Siddique told the court that police officials are not only making illegal detention of their leaders and workers but also taking an undertaking from them on the promise they will not join the long march.

He contended under what capacity the police officials are doing all this. To which the CJ Bhatti remarked that there should not be double standards in politics adding the concept of the politics should be very clear.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that the lawyers were also arrested. At which the CJ Bhatti remarked that when a person sits into the boat of politics then you could not differentiate that this or that could not be arrested. The province’s top judge remarked that the country is facing gigantic problems and it will move towards further loss if the things remained unchanged. The law officer told the court that the police released senator Ijaz.

As the consensus developed amongst the parties upon the undertaking, the CJ directed the CCPO to release the people after receiving their undertaking. To extent of the lawyer’s release, the CCPO was not directed to receive an undertaking from them. Justice Ch Abdul Aziz’s court Justice Ch. Abdul Aziz also directed the police high ups to share details of the detention orders by May 27 on a petition seeking direction to restrain police officials from harassing and making arrests of the PTI’s lawmakers and workers who wanted Imran Khan in his long march.

The petitions were filed by PTI’s lawyers and lawmaker Dr Yasmeen Rashid though advocate Azhar Siddique who implored the court that PTI had announced the long march on May 25 and the party works and supporters across the country were joining them at Islamabad the federal government and the provincial government has started undue interference into the peaceful arrangements of long march which is a basic right of every political party as well as the general public.

The police officials under the direction of respondents (Interior Minister, Chief Secretary, Secretary Home, Inspector General Punjab, Capital City Police Officer) have made miserable the life of innocent voters, supporters and members of PTI as well as their innocent families.

He added that the respondents not only harassed, and arrested their leaders and workers but also started blocking the main roads by placing containers and petrol pumps are also being pressured to stop the sale of the petrol to the city which is quite injustice to the general public.

The courts were requested that the directions be passed to the respondents to release all PTI workers, citizens, and individuals who are detained without lawful authority so that they may participate in the Haqeeqi Azaadi March (Long March).

All blockades, barriers and containers may kindly be removed immediately from all roads and paths from Lahore to Islamabad as well as across all of Punjab and surrounding areas, in the interest of enforcing the fundamental rights read with judgments and Article 4 and 5 of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.

It was further prayed the court that detention orders in the pretext of restraining participants from participating (including Mian Afzal Iqbal son of Mian Muhammad Iqbal, Naeem Riaz son of Riaz Ahmad, Ch Shahzad son of Mukhtar Ahmad, Farhat Fareed son of Abdul Lateef (police station Naseerabad, Lahore), Major (retd) Sajid Bukhari and Ikrma Bukhari) in the Haqeeqi Azaadi March (Long March) kindly be declared illegal, without lawful authority and unstructured exercise of discretion which violates the 24-A of General Clauses Act.


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