The Islamabad High Court on Friday stopped the authorities from arresting PTI chairman and previous high minister Imran Khan anyhow, such as undisclosed ones, filed towards him everywhere in the united states till May 15 (Monday).
The IHC bench additionally granted protecting bail to him in 3 terrorism cases filed against him in Lahore and the murder case of PTI activist Zillay Shah alias Ali Bilal.
Earlier in the day, a separate IHC bench granted the PTI chief meantime bail for 2 weeks inside the Al-Qadir Trust case.
The development comes an afternoon after the Supreme Court termed his arrest in the Al-Qadir Trust case as “invalid and illegal”.
On Tuesday this week, dozens of troops of paramilitary Rangers broke into an workplace of the IHC and whisked Imran away in an armoured vehicle in a whirlwind raid whilst executing the arrest warrant issued against the former best with the aid of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) within the Al-Qadir Trust case.
IHC CJ Aamer Farooq fashioned a two-judge bench — comprising Justice Miangul Hasan Aurangzeb and Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz — to hear Imran’s bail plea inside the Al-Qadir Trust case.
As the listening to began, a attorney stood up and chanted slogans in favour of the ousted foremost. Expressing its displeasure, the division bench cited that there should be entire silence, with Justice Miangul caution that the case would now not be heard if such acts continued.
The courtroom then took a wreck for Friday prayers.
When the hearing resumed, Imran stood up and asked everyone to listen to the complaints quietly.
He alleged that an character “had been planted” to disrupt the lawsuits earlier.
Reacting to his observation, Advocate General Islamabad Barrister Jahangir Khan Jadoon raised an objection and wondered why the PTI leader became levelling allegations.
“Jadoon sb, I am sorry but I did no longer say some thing approximately you,” answered Imran.
Khwaja Haris, representing the PTI leader, came to the rostrum and said his purchaser had written to NAB for a replica of the inquiry in the Al-Qadir Trust case.
“We got here to recognise thru the media that the inquiry has been converted into an research,” Haris maintained.
The attorney delivered that the manner wherein the inquiry changed into transformed into an investigation, the goal become to “arrest Imran right now”.
Haris persisted that NAB could convert an inquiry into an investigation handiest if there was sufficient proof.
“A notice became despatched to me on March 2 to which I responded,” he said, including that during his response, he informed the anti-graft frame that the attention become now not sent as in line with the necessities of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999.
Haris further argued that NAB had to tell the man or woman whether the summons was as an accused or as a witness.
He delivered that if a person were summoned as an accused, the bureau changed into purported to provide an explanation for the costs.
The courtroom then inquired if NAB had despatched a questionnaire to the PTI suggest.
To this, Haris answered that he had now not acquired a questionnaire.
However, he informed the bench that had sought similarly information.
He delivered that inside the Toshakhana (gift depository) case, a word become sent to him in the equal way and he had challenged it within the identical court.
“This court declared those notices unlawful,” said Haris.
The lawyer maintained that Imran changed into arrested, and an inquiry file turned into provided later.
However, on April 28, the inquiry changed into converted into an research.
Advocate General Islamabad Jadoon then began his arguments and said that he might now not speak the deserves of the case, but read Article 245 of the Constitution rather.
“The excessive court docket cannot listen a case in an area where the military has been summoned under Article 245,” he introduced.
Expressing its displeasure, the bench asked the AG Islamabad if the courtroom should remove all writ petitions because of Article 245.
Justice Aurangzeb then questioned if martial law had been imposed.
To this, Jadoon responded the army was called to aid within the restoration of regulation and order following violent protests.
The court docket then summoned NAB Prosecutor Sardar Muzaffar Abbasi to the rostrum.
Abbasi knowledgeable the bench that Imran had in no way regarded earlier than the bureau.
The NAB prosecutor similarly informed the court docket that former duty czar Shahzad Akbar become also sent a observe but he did now not be a part of the inquiry.
The court then granted the PTI leader weeks interim bail and barred NAB from arresting him.
The NAB prosecutor tried to talk in addition but turned into advised through Justice Aurangzeb to stay quiet because the courtroom had introduced the order.
The court in its order also stated that the ousted most useful should now not be arrested anyhow, registered in Islamabad after May nine, till May 17.
It also stated that it might decide whether the PTI leader’s bail must be cancelled or extended at the following hearing.
Later, IHC’s Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri granted Imran defensive bail in three terrorism cases filed against him in Lahore for eleven days towards surety bonds really worth Rs50,000 each.
Justice Jahangiri also granted defensive bail to the PTI chief inside the murder case of Zillay Shah – a PTI activist who became killed in the course of a celebration rally in Lahore earlier this yr — against surety bonds well worth Rs50,000 until May 22.
The decide barred the police from arresting the ousted most beneficial and directed him to seem inside the applicable court in Lahore after a duration of 11 days.
The IHC also halted the lawsuits of the Toshakhana case towards Imran in the trial court docket till June 8.
IHC CJ Farooq heard the case filed by using the previous high minister on this connection.
At the outset of the listening to, Imran lawyer Haris argued that the complaint changed into filed inside the trial court docket with the aid of an unauthorised authority.
The case became filed via the district election commissioner even as the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) had now not accredited all of us to record the case.