IHC rejects PTI chief Imran Khan’s pleas seeking bail and dismissal of FIR in cipher case

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Friday rejected two pleas of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chairman Imran Khan in the cipher case seeking bail and dismissal of FIR.

Imran had filed several petitions in the IHC that included seeking a stay for his jail trial, for bail in the cipher case, against his indictment in the cipher case, to suspend the Toshakhana verdict, and one seeking cancellation of the first information report in the cipher case.

On Oct 16, the IHC reserved its verdict on the pleas seeking bail and quashing of the FIR while also disposing of the petition challenging the PTI chief’s jail trial.

Chief Justice Aamer Farooq announced the verdict that was reserved on Oct 16.

THE JUDGEMENT

The 20-page verdict written by the Chief Justice declared both petitions as “without merit” and were “accordingly dismissed”.

“It is clarified that any observations, made hereinabove, are tentative in nature and shall not prejudice learned trial court during the trial,” it added.

On the matter of the plea seeking dismissal of the case, the court stated that the petitioner had the “efficacious and alternate remedy by way of moving an appropriate application” under section 249-A (power of magistrate to acquit accused at any stage) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

“Moreover, the petitioner is co-accused in the case and even if the arguments advanced for quashing of FIR on his behalf are accepted, FIR cannot be quashed in as much as there are other co-accused and there cannot be a partial quashing of FIR,” the verdict said.

Referring to a previous Supreme Court verdict, the IHC added it showed that “contents of cipher were such that they only called for demarche and not any further strict action, as there was no conspiracy of any kind”.

Addressing the arguments made in the pleas, the judgment said the former prime minister, “when addressed the public gathering, was not doing so pursuant to the performance of his duties as prime minister, rather it was a political engagement”.

Noting that the punishment for the offense committed under section 5(1)(a) (wrongful communication, etc of information) of the Official Secrets Act was “death or imprisonment up to fourteen years”, the chief justice said it attracted the prohibitory clause of section 497 (when bail may be taken in case of non-bailable offense) of the CrPC and “there does not exist any ground for further inquiry”.

“The case law cited by the petitioner for grant of bail in the facts and circumstances is not relevant in as much as undoubtedly the evidence is all documentary but according to the prosecution, the copy of cipher is still in the custody of the petitioner and […] where allegations are serious and prima facie link the accused with the commission of the offense, bail is to be denied in case of Official Secrets Act, 1923.”