FIA’s adjournment plea in cypher case rejected

Imran’s lawyer tells IHC that FIR was filed after delay of 17 months

ISLAMABAD:

The Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) prosecutor’s adjournment plea on Tuesday was rejected by the Islamabad High Court in the cipher case on the grounds that the bench was currently hearing the arguments presented by the defence lawyer representing PTI founding chairman Imran Khan and they were not going to conclude in a day.

As IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb started the hearing of the maintainability of the appeal filed by the deposed premier against the sentence handed down to him in the cipher case, FIA Special Prosecutor Hamid Ali Shah informed the court that the paper books of the matter were not ready yet.

He further said records had to be reviewed and time was needed to prepare the case. The prosecutor continued that any unnecessary adjournment would not be sought once the case had started.
Justice Aurangzeb pointed out that the appellant's lawyer had just started his arguments and they would not conclude in a day.

Imran’s lawyer Barrister Salman Safdar argued before the court that the cipher case concerned the foreign affairs ministry but it was the then interior secretary Yousuf Naseem Khokhar, who filed the complaint.

He further pointed out that the FIR was filed after a delay of 17 months.

The defence counsel further informed the court that former prime minister's principal secretary Azam Khan was the accused in the FIR but he was cited as a witness in the challan.
Safdar explained the background of the case and read out the text of the FIR. He added that there are two aspects to this appeal -- the merits of the case and the other one related to how it was handled.
He said Azam went missing, a petition was filed in this connection, and an FIR was registered.
The court inquired was this all part of the case. The defence lawyer replied in the negative.

Safdar told the court that Azam was cross-examined by the government’s defense counsel but not asked any question about his alleged abduction.

Justice Aurangzeb inquired whether or not the government’s lawyer had asked Azam about his alleged abduction despite knowing all the facts.

The IHC CJ observed that a person, who had been appointed the defence counsel, had to fulfill their responsibility.

Safdar said the defense counsel completed the cross-examination of 21 witnesses in 48 hours.
He added that the courts had made it clear that someone could only be arrested in the presence of solid evidence.

The IHC CJ remarked that there were certain requirements for arresting a person.
He added that unfortunately, a mindset prevailed in the country that an FIR was enough to round up someone.

The judge noted that it was practice in the civilised world to call a person for an investigation first. He continued that if the person cooperated in the investigation, there was no need to arrest them but it was a different situation if something had to be recovered.

Safdar said it would take him around two hours to complete his arguments.

Justice Aurangzeb noted that this was not an ordinary FIR and this was the first case of its kind. The IHC CJ told the defence lawyer that he should not take the matter so easily and come full prepared in the future.

The hearing was adjourned till March 11.