ATC dismisses Imran Khan’s bails in three May 9 riot cases

An anti-terrorism court (ATC) on Tuesday rejected the interim bail of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan in three cases related to May 9 riots. 

ATC Judge Khalid Arshad announced the reserved verdict on Imran Khan's bail petitions concerning attacks on Jinnah House, Askari Tower, and the torching of Shadman Police Station. 

The court had reserved its verdict on the bail petitions after the completion of arguments by the parties on July 6. 

Barrister Salman Safdar represented Imran Khan and argued for bail while Special Prosecutors Rana Abdul Jabbar and Rana Azhar opposed the bail petitions during the final arguments on behalf of the prosecution.

Earlier, on August 11, 2023, an ATC had revoked pre-arrest bails for Imran Khan in seven cases due to his absence, as he was imprisoned following his conviction in the Toshakhana case. 

However, the Lahore High Court overturned the ATC’s decision and reinstated Imran Khan’s bail petitions based on his appeal. 

Also Read: Shah Mahmood Qureshi acquitted in May 9 violence case

A few months ago, another ATC had granted interim bail to Imran Khan in four cases involving attacks near Zaman Park, the murder of PTI activist Zile Shah, the burning of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz office in Model Town, and an incident with a container at Kalma Chowk.

Last week, on July 3, a district and sessions court in Islamabad acquitted the PTI founder along with all other defendants in a case registered at Islamabad’s Aabpara police station.

Judicial Magistrate Yasir Mahmood announced the reserved verdict, clearing Imran Khan, Shah Mahmood Qureshi, Sheikh Rasheed, Shehryar Afridi, Faisal Javed, Raja Khurram Nawaz, Ali Nawaz Awan, Asad Qaiser, and others of all charges.

The acquittal came after the defence, represented by Advocate Sardar Masroof and Ansar Kiani, presented their arguments on behalf of accused Imran Khan, Sheikh Rasheed, and others.

Moreover, on July 1, at least 140 workers of PTI were acquitted in a case related to holding a rally before the general elections.

The court found that the accused were neither arrested at the scene nor was any incriminating material recovered from them. Furthermore, there were no complaints from local residents regarding road blockades.