Shahbaz Gill's bail plea hearing adjourned over IO's absence

Court gives IO 'last chance' to present record, adjourns hearing till August 29

Saqib Bashir August 27, 2022
Shahbaz Gill under police custody. PHOTO: EXPRESS/FILE


Hearing of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Shahbaz Gill’s bail application was adjourned till August 29 due to the absence of the investigating officer.

Additional Sessions Judge Tahir Abbas Supra was conducting the hearing, during which prosecutor Raja Rizwan Abbasi and the lawyers of the accused were also present.

The prosecutor informed the court that the record was not yet available as the investigation officer was in Karachi.

According to the police officials, the investigation officer was contacted but was out of reach with his cell phone switched off.

Prosecutor Rizwan Abbasi said that even if the record is presented now, he would not be able to give arguments. “I also want to look at the record, I am not ready yet,” he said.

He suggested that the hearing be adjourned till Monday (August 29).

Read Islamabad court grants police two-day custody of Shahbaz Gill

Gill’s lawyers argued that the case was unnecessarily facing delays due to the police. Judge Tahir Abbas Supra said that the IO was being given a last chance, and adjourned the hearing till Monday.

Gill files bail plea

Earlier this week, the PTI leader had filed a bail application at a local sessions court after he was charged with inciting rebellion against institutions.

He filed the plea through his legal team and within it stated that the case against him was created on the basis of “bad faith and political malice."

Gill contended that parts of his statement – which he was incarcerated for – were distorted and included in the first informant report (FIR) of the case. The application stated that Gill could not be prosecuted under the provisions mentioned in the FIR.

The PTI leader requested that the court grant him bail.


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