The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Friday expressed reservations over pleas seeking the release of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) leaders and workers presently under voluntary arrest.
"First you people decided to voluntarily offer arrests, boarded prison vans with your own consent and now you have come to increase the court's burden seeking recovery," Justice Shehram Sarwar remarked as he headed the proceedings.
Read PTI’s Jail Bharo Tehreek loses steam
It may be noted that the arrests were offered by several PTI leaders and workers as part of the party's 'Jail Bharo' movement -- a drive that seeks to mark a protest against the government's policies and to put pressure on the government to announce elections.
Petitioners senator Ijaz Ch, Syeda Nuria Humaira Rafique wife of Waleed Iqbal, and others filed petitions requesting the court to direct the concerned quarters to produce the PTI's detained leadership, including "Shah Mehmood Qureshi, Asad Umar, Umar Sarfraz Cheema, Azam Swati, Waleed Iqbal, Murad Rass and several others before the court after recovering them from illegal detention of the respondents".
As proceedings commenced, Justice Shehram asked how and when were the leaders and workers taken into custody. To which the counsels responded that more than 100 PTI leaders and workers have been kept in illegal custody.
They submitted that those detained had been taken into custody as part of the movement offering voluntary arrests in a bid to uphold the supremacy of the Constitution.
Justice Shehram asked Zain Qureshi if his father, prominent leader Shah Mehmood Qureshi, had also been arrested.
Read More Rana says 'miscreants' to be arrested as PTI’s ‘Jail Bharo’ drive approaches
Urging the court to allow the family to meet the former foreign minister, Zain Qureshi confirmed that his father was indeed under arrest.
"You can go to Chairing Cross if you wanted to meet him," Justice Shehram remarked.
Zain Qureshi responded that the family had done so but were told that "their arrests were not made".
One of the lawyers requested the court to seek a report on the matter from the provincial government.
"What report should be sought?" the judge asked.
The counsel argued that neither was due process followed in the arrests nor were the arrested individuals presented before any court of law.
Upon this, the judge said that "your concern is why your leaders and workers have been taken away from Lahore, in that case, you should have requested the home secretary to put them under house arrest instead".
The counsel pleaded with the court to seek replies from the concerned authorities and continue hearing on the matter today. However, the court rejected the request.
Nonetheless, Justice Shehram sought replies from concerned quarters by February 27.
Petitions
The petitioners have implored the court that PTI started its “Jail Bharo” movement on February 22 for the supremacy of the Constitution wherein thousands of workers and supporters of PTI offered their voluntary arrests from different areas.
The respondents including Inspector General Prison and CCPO Lahore on the direction of the Additional Chief Secretary Home arrested them from Mall Road. From there they were then taken first to the camp jail and then later to the Central Jail, Kot Lakhpat, Lahore. The detainees were not provided with food and necessary medicine, the petitions stated.
Also Read PTI threatens 'Jail Bharo Tehreek' if Punjab polls delayed
Petitioner Ijaz Chaudhry contended that the lives of PTI’s leaders Shah Mehmood Qureshi, Asad Umar, Umar Sarfraz Cheema, Azam Swati, Murad Rass and others were at stake.
The petitioners submitted that if the detainees are not recovered from illegal and unlawful detention, they could suffer irreparable loss and injury.
The petitions also expressed fears that the PTI leaders and workers may be falsely accused of involvement in unlawful activities to cause them "maximum harm", adding that they have been transported to "some unknown place" to "torture" them.
They prayed that the LHC may ensure the recovery of the PTI leaders and worker from "illegal and unlawful custody".
COMMENTS (1)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ