Former Prime Minister and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan filed an application in the special court hearing the cypher case on Saturday seeking the court's approval to engage in weekly conversations with his sons, Sulaiman Isa Khan and Qasim Khan.
Imran filed the application through advocate Shiraz Ahmed Ranjha and mentioned his WhatsApp conversation with his sons on October 21, arranged by a jail superintendent complying with the court's initial order.
However, owing to Judge Abul Hasnat Zulqarnain's unavailability, no action has yet been taken on Imran's plea.
Earlier, an Attock Jail superintendent objected and hindered compliance with the court's order to allow Imran to speak with his sons over phone calls. He said that the prison manual prohibits phone calls for those charged under the Official Secrets Act.
Read Imran terms Nawaz’s return ‘total mockery of law’
However, the judge later ordered the Adiala jail superintendent to enable a telephone conversation between Imran and his sons via WhatsApp, while noting the standard operating procedures (SOPs) for arranging conversations between the accused and their relatives.
The conversation, held via WhatsApp, lasted for 30 minutes and was arranged by the jail superintendent between 4:30 pm and 5 pm. Reports suggest that while Imran's sons, residing in the United Kingdom with their mother, became emotional during the interaction, their father remained composed and reassuring.
The trial against Imran under the Official Secrets Act, 1923, involves allegations of misusing a diplomatic cypher. He is currently detained in Rawalpindi's Adiala Jail, having previously been in Attock Jail after a conviction in the Toshakhana (gifts repository) case on August 5.
Imran was arrested on May 9 by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on charges of corruption related to the Al-Qadir Trust. He asserts that the cases against him are fabricated and vows to prove his innocence.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ