Quetta police gets two-day transit remand of Khadija Shah

Counsel summons Khadija, IGP


Rana Yasif December 11, 2023
Khadija Shah. PHOTO COLLAGE: EXPRESS

LAHORE:

The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Monday summoned fashion designer Khadija Shah after her transit remand was given by an anti-terrorism court (ATC) to Balochistan police pertaining to a case registered against her in Quetta. 

LHC's Justice Ali Baqar Najafi also summoned Punjab's inspector general. During the proceedings, the petitioner's counsel, Barrister Sameer Khosa, informed the court of how they were drawing attention to the conduct under which Khadija was being treated. 

ATC Proceedings

On Monday, Balochistan police submitted an application before the ATC seeking transit remand for the fashion designer. The police contended in its application that ATC Quetta had issued her arrest warrants and that the police had yet to investigate the case and produce her before the relevant court, the transit remand of Khadija is required.

ATC Judge Abher Gul Khan admitted the application and granted a two-day transit remand to the police with directions to produce her before the relevant court.

Earlier, LHC’s proceeding

Justice Ali Baqar Najafi had reserved a decision on a plea challenging the ‘detention order’ of Khadija after hearing the detailed arguments of her counsel and the law officer, who on different occasions could not satisfy the court when asked how her detention was justified.

Read LHC reserves verdict on Khadija Shah’s detention

Advocate Sameer Khosa had raised several questions over the illegality committed in implicating Khadija in FIRs, her arrest, and her detention through an order issued under 3-MPO for a period of 30 days to maintain the law and order situation in the city.

On the other hand, the government seems to be lingering on this matter under one after another pretext. On different occasions, Justice Najafi seemed to be coming down hard over delaying tactics by the government, either in deciding the review application of the petitioner against the detention order or even the delay in holding the cabinet’s meeting or its decision upon this matter.

Justice Najafi was hearing a plea filed by petitioner Jehanzeb Amin, husband of Khadija, challenging the detention order of his wife with a request to the court to restrain the concerned authorities from removing or even transferring Khadija from the jurisdiction of Lahore or from within the jurisdiction of the LHC.

LHC grants bail to Khadija Shah

It is worth mentioning that LHC’s division bench had granted Khadija post-arrest bail in two FIRs related to arson at Askari Tower and attacking Jinnah House registered against her in response to the May 9 riots.

Read LHC reserves decision on plea challenging Khadija Shah’s detention

As the LHC granted her bail, the police arrested her in a third FIR under the allegation of abetting arson in Rahat Bakery.

Contempt plea

She then filed a plea in LHC seeking contempt proceedings against police high-ups who, according to her, deceived the court by submitting a report that only two FIRs had been registered against her. She contended in her plea that the court had sought a report from CCPO Lahore, who admitted only two FIRs against her, but when she was granted bail in these two FIRs, the third FIR emerged.

This plea is still pending before Justice Ali Baqar Najafi, who seemed unsatisfactory with the CCPO’s report.

IGP fails to satisfy court

Further, on the court’s direction, the Inspector General of Police (IGP) Punjab Dr. Usman Anwar, appeared before the court, but he could not satisfy the court upon its repeated queries of why Khadija was arrested in the third case when she was already granted bail.

Moreover, the judge inquired as to why the police preferred to wait for the court’s final order on her bail and why she was not interrogated during custody. Who will guarantee that she will not be arrested if she is granted bail in the third FIR, the justice added.

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