Imran, Qureshi get bail in cipher case

ISLAMABAD:

The Supreme Court on Friday granted bail to former prime minister Imran Khan and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Shah Mahmood Qureshi in the cipher case. However, their immediate release from Adiala Jail is hindered by their involvement in other ongoing cases.

A three-member bench, led by acting Chief Justice Sardar Tariq Masood granted the bail relief against surety bonds of Rs1 million each. The court said that at this stage there was no sufficient incriminating material to show that Imran revealed the information in the cipher to the general public.

"We, therefore, are of the tentative opinion that there are not reasonable grounds for believing, at this stage, that the petitioners have committed the offence punishable under clause (b) of Section 5(3) of the [Official Secrets] Act,” the court said.

“That there are sufficient grounds for further inquiry into their guilt of the said offence, which is to be finally decided by the learned trial court after recording of the evidence of the parties,” added the judgment, authored by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, a member of the bench.

The cipher case pertains to a piece of paper that Imran had waved at a public rally on March 27, 2022, ahead of a vote of confidence that he lost. The former prime minister, later naming the US, had claimed that the cipher was ‘evidence’ of an “international conspiracy” to topple his government.

Imran and Qureshi, who served as the foreign minister at that time, were first indicted in the case on October 23.

However, on November 21, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) declared that their in-camera trial was without lawful authority.

On December 13, a special court established under the Official Secrets Act (OSA) indicted Imran and Qureshi.

Judge Abul Hasnat Zulqarnain read out the charge-sheet that stated that both accused made a classified document public for personal gain and harmed the nation’s reputation and security.

Read Hopes of PTI supporters dashed

On November 3, Imran moved the apex court for the post-arrest bail, following rejection of his petition for post-arrest bail and for dismissal of the first information report (FIR) of the case by the IHC on October 27.

The Supreme Court said in the judgment that the discretion exercised by the High Court in declining bail to the petitioners was “found to have been exercised perversely, that is, against the weight of the material available on record of the case, which warrants interference” by the Supreme Court.

Under the OSA, the court noted, the offences of “wrongful communication of the official confidential information, etc”, which were generally punishable with imprisonment for a term of up to two years, a fine, or with both, were bailable.

“The bail applications of the petitioners are accepted subject to their furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of one million [rupees] with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court,” read the judgment.

Furthermore, the court said that the observations made “in this order are of tentative nature which shall not in any manner influence the trial court, and that this concession of bail may be cancelled, if the petitioners misuse it in any manner, including causing delay” in the expeditious conclusion of the trial.

Earlier, during the hearing of the bail pleas, the bench members, acting Chief Justice Sardar Tariq Masood, Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Athar Minallah, gave important observations on the facts of the main case.

Barrister Sulaiman Safdar, lawyer for the PTI founder, told the court that four accused were named in the FIR, also including Asad Umar and Azam Khan. He added, Umar was never arrested, while Azam Khan first went missing and then came to the fore and gave a statement against Imran.

Justice Masood enquired whether any investigation was conducted regarding Azam’s prolonged disappearance. Justice Minallah also asked the question whether the former principal secretary had gone on a “tour of the northern areas” too.

Justice Masood intervened, instructing Safdar to refrain from discussing politics and focus on legal arguments.

Safdar's attempt to assert that the cipher case was politically motivated was curtailed. He also maintained that the former prime minister did not display the cipher during the Parade Ground rally.

He pointed out that the foreign ministry was not a complainant in the case, rather it was initiated by the then interior minister. He said that Azam Khan was “kidnapped for statement”. On that Justice Masood remarked that he had heard of kidnapping for ransom.

Read more Will PTI’s virtual strength translate into votes?

Justice Masood observed that the statement of one witness in the case was taken on oath, but the statement of Azam Khan, who was the then principal secretary to the former prime minister, was taken without oath.

Justice Shah observed that Asad Majeed, the author of the diplomatic cipher to the foreign ministry, did not mention in his statement that another country had gained an advantage. Thus far, Justice Shah added, no testimony from any witness had demonstrated that any foreign power had derived benefits.

Raja Rizwan Abbasi, the special prosecutor from the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), informed the court about the significant attention the cipher-waving incident had garnered in India. Justice Minallah said that the court did not want to comment on the Baloch families on Thursday, but “what had happened to them?”

Abbasi argued that any negative impact on bilateral relations would ultimately benefit the enemy, citing a deterioration in Pakistan's relations with the United States. In response, Justice Minallah cautioned the lawyer, stating that his actions were verging on becoming a matter of jest.

Despite the bail relief, Imran and Qureshi remained in the Adiala Jail on Friday. Imran is currently under judicial remand in the £190 million case, and also under arrest in the Toshakhana case filed by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB).

Additional note

Justice Minallah in his additional note said that Imran and Qureshi’s release on bail during the period of polls would ensure “genuine elections” and enable the people to exercise their right to express their will effectively and meaningfully.

“There are no exceptional circumstances to decline the concession of bail," he wrote. He also questioned the 2018 elections. "The last general election held in 2018 was an example of denying equal treatment to a particular political party,” he added.

Going further past in the chequered history of the country, the apex court judge observed that one of the prime ministers was even sent to the gallows and the people were later restrained from attending his funeral.