Pakistan Tehreek e Insaf (PTI)’s Chairman Imran Khan Tuesday approached the Islamabad High Court (IHC) seeking termination of FIR against him on alleged threatening remarks about a woman judge. He prayed the court to issue directives for quashing the FIR against him registered under clauses of Anti Terrorism Act (ATA). Responding to the show-cause notice served on him by the Islamabad High Court (IHC) in contempt proceedings, PTI Chairman Imran Khan Monday offered to take back his remarks about Additional District and Sessions judge Zeba Chaudhry. Imran, through his attorney, claimed that at the time of passing the remarks did not know that Chaudhry, who had approved the remand of his chief of staff Shahbaz Gill in a sedition case, was a judicial officer. Imran said he had the “misconception” that she was an executive magistrate performing administrative duties for the federal government. “The respondent [Imran] submits with humility that if the words he uttered is regarded as inappropriate, he is willing to take them back,” the PTI chief stated in his provisional reply submitted to the high court. Imran’s counsel maintained that the ex-premier had mistaken the additional sessions judge for the magistrate. “It was in this misconception that she was referred to a magistrate,” it said, adding that the PTI chief had no intention of saying anything against the judicial officer. “It is submitted that the respondent had no motive (ill-will) behind the said speech or remarks, nor were those directed specifically towards the judicial officer.” It argued that after seeing visuals of the physical torture and hearing about the sexual abuse on Shahbaz Gill during custody, the PTI chief had been disturbed. “It was neither intended to obstruct the course of justice as the order for remand had already been issued. Imran’s counsel said that fair comment and criticism was desirable for the administration of justice and hence should be allowed.
He also contended that the deputy registrar of the court had completely “misconceived the law and his own powers” by writing a note to the IHC and demanding contempt proceedings against Imran. The PTI chief’s response in court also said that he had not committed any contempt of court, rather his words at the F-9 rally were taken out “selectively” and blown “out of context” to give an impression that he wanted to take things in his hands.
“On the contrary, it was the legal right of every citizen to complain about the conduct/misconduct of a judge or any other public functionary in accordance with the law,” it maintained, adding that the “gender debate” regarding Imran’s speech was initiated by some journalists and politicians.
The counsel claimed that Imran’s words “aap sab sharam karayn” was taken in a different context and regrettably viewed as contemptuous. “It is submitted with respect that such words were uttered spontaneously without any previous motive or malice only to emphasise that the rule of law should be strictly followed in the matter of Shahbaz Gill by the authorities.”
Furthermore, Imran called for a “judicial inquiry” into the matter of Gill’s torture and government crackdown on journalists “for the protection of the fundamental rights of the citizens”.
His response added that the PTI chief did not believe in hurting the honourable judges and categorically clarified that it was not his intent.
Subsequently, it prayed that the show-cause notice against him be discharged and contempt proceedings be disposed of.
