Lahore:
An Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) in Lahore Monday revealed its judgment in two separate 9 May cases and sentenced some important PTI leaders, including Umar Sarfraz Cheema, Dr. Yasmin Rashid, Ejaz Chaudhry and Mian Mehmoodur Rasheed.
However, ATC, who held his procedure in a courtroom in Lahore’s Kot Lakhpat prison, acquitted PTI -Valukdtor Shah Mahmood Qureshi in both cases registered in the wake of rebel events that broke out after the arrest of PTI founder Imran Khan on May 9, 2023.
Lahore ATC-in-Judge Manzer Ali Gill revealed his verdict reserved one week back in two cases related to the combustion of police cars at Rahat Bakery near Lahore Corps Commander House and Attack on Shadman Police Station on May 9, 2023.
In the Rahat Bakery case, the judge acquitted seven of the 17 accused, including Shah Mahmood Qureshi, but convicted the others, including Cheema, Dr. Yasmin, Ejaz Chaudhry, Rashid for ten years in prison.
Those who were acquitted also included Muhammad Awais, Faizan, Taya Sultan, Shahid Baig, Sohail Khan, Rafiuddin, Fared Khan, Sulaiman Ahmad, Abdul Qadir and Majid Ali.
In the Shadman Police Station Attack case, ATC acquired 12 of the 25 accused people, including Shah Mahmood Qureshi.
However, it convicted Cheema, Dr. Yasmin Rashid, Ejaz Chuadhry, Rashid and sentenced them to 10 years in prison. The court also sentenced Ptis Aliya Hamza and Sanam Javed and sentenced them to 5 years in prison.
Earlier, under arguments, the accused lawyer, Burhan Moazzam Malik, questioned the implication of the accused persons in the four, stating that counterfeit and junk content had been drafted against innocent persons.
He also drawn the court’s attention to Article 13 of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, which says “nobody should be punished twice for the same offense.”
He said the prosecution attributed on the 9th of May -Camments to PTI’s leadership. He said that conspiracy is a single action – yet the penalties are awarded to the PTI management for it.
He argued that prosecution testifies Asi Hassam Afzal and Constable Khalid admitted during a cross -examination that they had made statements in five different ATCs to date and their statement registered in this case was their sixth. They further admitted that all these statements related to the same alleged conspiracy, which is said to have been pierced in Zaman Park, Lahore.
The prosecution also admitted that five of these courts have already announced their judgments in the relevant cases in which they had set aside earlier.
On the basis of their statements in these cases, the ATCs registered convictions against some of the accused persons, thereby already awarding punishment to the same accused of the same offense based on the same evidence made by these witnesses.
It was also argued that the accused Dr. Yasmin Rashid and Shah Mahmood Qureshi have already been tried by ATC in FIR 97/2023, registered on the police station Sarwar Road, where Yasmin was convicted of hatching this conspiracy in Zaman Park while Qureshi was acquitted.
Therefore, any further prosecution, trial or case against both accused constitutional, illegal and illegal under Articles 4 and 13 of Pakistan’s constitution is read with section 403 of CRPC and section 26 of the General Clauses Act.
He maintained that the prosecution or any case against the same accused persons on the same claim for the same offense based on the same evidence is blocked and not justified by law.
With regard to non-inspiration of the alleged conspiracy place of investigative (iOS), non-identification of the prosecution and the absence of a place plan, Malik claimed that both witnesses to the alleged conspiracy never pointed out any conspiracy.
IOS also admitted that they had never visited or inspected the alleged conspiracy place and further admitted that any place plan had never been prepared for such a place. This means that no such conspiracy was ever wiped out and the prosecution could not prove the claim.
He argued that Qureshi, Dr. Yasmin, Aliya Hamza and others neither alleged to have been present on the spot nor accused of having committed any malice or causing damage to property.
No specific claim of causing harm to any property or committing any evil – whether of arson or otherwise – was ever leveled against any of the other accused throughout the trial.
Malik emphasized that none of the defendants were mentioned as being present on the alleged scene of the crime in FIR; No functions or descriptions were given by unknown accused persons in FIR, and no claims were made of any claim from any of the defendants while physically at the site of occurrence.
He claimed that no claim for occasion or provocation through social media was leveled in FIR. There was no explanation for the delay in filing for the complainant, and there was no claim of any conspiracy that was wasted at Zaman Park was mentioned in FIR.
He said in FIR that no witness was mentioned about any alleged opportunity or conspiracy, nor time, date or place of the alleged conspiracy.
Another lawyer, Rana Mudassar Umar, claimed that there is no concrete evidence available to establish any connection between the accused persons and the charges in the FIR.
They argued that politically motivated cases had been registered against the defendants simply to humiliate and blackmail them, adding that they were involved in forged cases to stand by PTI’s basic chairman, Imran Khan.
However, the prosecution asked the court that there was significant and cogente evidence against the defendants who showed that they called on the public to commit the offense.
It added that the defendants are fully involved in the offenses committed on May 9, including wiping out a conspiracy, damage state properties, putting police cars on fire and creating legal and order problems, anarchy and chaos.
