LHC restrains authorities from arresting PML-N lawmakers

Petitioners say police had raided their houses and offices but the officials refused to give any record


Rana Yasif August 12, 2022
PHOTO: FILE

LAHORE:

The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Friday restrained the authorities concerned from taking any illegal measures and sought parawise comments in a petition filed by three PML-N’s prominent lawmakers.

Petitioners Rana Mashhood Ahmad Khan, Malik Mohammad Ahmed Khan and Attaullah Tarar had approached the court seeking directions to bar the relevant quarters from making their arrest, harassing them and avoiding taking any legal action till the decision of this petition.

The petitioners contended that PTI Chairman Imran Khan in his public address on May 22, 2022, announced “Real Azadi March” against the elected government of PML-N and asked his workers and leaders across the country to reach the Srinagar Highway on May 25, 2022 to topple the government if his demand of dissolution of assembly and announcement for fresh elections in the country was not announced as he believed that the vote of no-confidence was passed against him under the “US conspiracy”.

Though the conspiracy mantra proved false and fabricated by the Supreme Court, they added.

Their counsel implored the court that Imran Khan had directly threaten the federal government and instigated the masses for revolt and anarchy pushing the federal government which was at its nascent stage and was already facing a precarious law and order to handle the situation in a lawful manner so that the life of the individuals could be protected and the peace of the country be maintained.

The counsel submitted that the workers of the PTI after this announcement by their leader started disrupting normal life by blocking the roads, threatening businesses forcing the government to take action against the leaders of the PTI.

In its aftermath, Islamabad High Court Bar Association President Shoaib Shaheen filed a petition before

Supreme Court for holding of Azadi March announced by PTI

A three-member bench headed by Justice Ijazul Ahsan had directed the federal government to provide security and an alternative place for the marchers for their public gathering.

It is worth mentioning that the interior secretary and IG Islamabad informed the bench of law and order situation prevailing in the country and requested the court to ask to postpone the march but one of the judges warned their officers to “stay within your limits” and “realise and fulfil” their responsibilities.

Also read: Imran granted bail in 'Azadi march' vandalism cases

The petition said Imran Khan and his supporters dishonoured the assurances given to the court and public and private properties were damaged and destroyed and trees in the greenbelt of Blue Area of Islamabad were put on fire during the party’s protest in May. Around 31 police officers were injured by stones pelting by workers of the PTI and his allies, they claimed.

The counsel argued that the same case happened in Punjab, the petitioners being ministers of the provincial government under the direction of the Supreme Court gave a free hand to the leaders and workers of PTI but the party workers the instigation of their leadership disrupted routine life by blocking the roads.

He implored the court that in Punjab this anti-government movement was started with the election of Hamza Shahbaz as chief minister Punjab after the resignation of former chief minister Usman Buzdar and the resolution of vote of no-confidence against Pervaiz Elahi, then Speaker of the provincial assembly.

He contended that the petitioners approached the officials to provide the record of cases registered against them as the police had raided their houses and offices but the respondents refused to give any record and asked to surrender them as they have clear instructions from the political head of the provincial government.

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

E-Publications

Most Read