LAHORE: With a majority decision of two to one, a Lahore High Court full bench on Wednesday dismissed two criminal revision appeals challenging a trial court decision on a private complaint filed by the Pakistan Awami Tehreek/Idara Minhajul Quran regarding 2014 Model Town incident.

The PAT had assailed an anti-terrorism court (ATC) verdict to the extent of non-summoning 12 bureaucrats and parliamentarians (from previous parliament) of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), including former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, nominated as accused by the party in its complaint.

On the other side, former inspector general of Punjab police, Mushtaq Ahmad Sukhera, had challenged the decision to the effect of his summoning by the ATC in the complaint.

At least 14 persons were killed and over 100 injured during an ‘anti-encroachment’ operation outside the Model Town residence of PAT chief Dr Tahirul Qadri on June 17, 2014. Jawad Hamid of PAT had filed the private complaint before the trial court and a subsequent appeal in the high court.

Though all the three judges reached a consensus view, dismissing appeal of Mr Sukhera, Justice Muhammad Qasim Khan, head of the bench, dissented and allowed the PAT appeal against non-summoning the former parliamentarians by the ATC. However, the majority decision prevails.

PAT to move SC against the decision

Justice Aalia Neelum authored the majority judgment, while Justice Sardar Ahmad Naeem endorsed it.

The parliamentarians and bureaucrats not summoned by the ATC include former premier Nawaz Sharif, former chief minister Shahbaz Sharif, now Punjab opposition leader Hamza Shahbaz, former law minister Rana Sanaullah Khan, former railway minister Khwaja Saad Rafiq, former defence minister Khwaja Asif, former information minister Pervez Rashid, former state minister Abid Sher Ali, former interior minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, then personal secretary to chief minister Syed Tauqir Shah, former home secretary Azam Suleman and then Lahore commissioner Rashid Mahmood Langrial.

The majority judgement ruled that the order of non-summoning the respondents did not suffer from any illegality as the trial court examined all the witnesses the petitioner/complainant desired to produce and intended to rely upon, thus there was a compliance of provisions of Section 202 Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).

It said the statement of the complainant did not disclose ingredients essential to criminal conspiracy and abetment on part of the then prime minister and other respondents.

“The allegations leveled in the private complaint are not based on direct knowledge derived from any individual, but on conjectures and presumptions. Evidently, conscious of the fact that the respondent No. 1 to 12 are not responsible for offence (or) abetment sought by the complainant,” ruled the verdict.

It maintained that the allegations did not also make out a case of abetment, criminal conspiracy and criminal intimidation. “It was not a case of mere embellishment, it is an afterthought plea advanced by the petitioner/complainant and is based on motivation,” the ruling said.

“It is beyond the pale of controversy, that the respondent Nos. 1 to 12 could not be proceeded against, without the complainant having made a prima facie case against them, that they hatched up conspiracy for commission of this occurrence. At least, what is alleged in the private complaint and by the complainant and witnesses got in their cursory statements are not in line with the contents of written complaint dated 19-06-2014,” the majority verdict further ruled.

The judgement noted that the complainant boycotted investigations conducted by two joint investigation teams (JITs) formed in the case as well as proceedings of one-man inquiry tribunal of the high court.

The judges observed, “It may not be proper for this court (LHC) to enter into reasoning for non-summoning the respondents as accused at this point of time when no allegation is made against the respondents and proceeding against them on the basis of such complaint would be abuse of process of court.”

They ruled that the matter could not be remanded to the trial court for further inquiry in specified manner as the judge of the ATC applied his mind while recording order of non-summoning respondents as accused, therefore, it could not be said that the reasoning given for non-summoning the respondents as accused by the judge ATC was illegal and perverse.

Dismissing the appeal of Mr Sukhera, in a consolidated judgement the bench ruled that sufficient material for summoning the petitioner was available before the trial court and no illegality, irregularity or jurisdictional defect had been found in the impugned order.

It said the petitioner (Mr Sukhera) also had a remedy before the trial court to move an application under section 265-K of the Cr.P.C. for redress of his grievance.

DISSENTING NOTE: Justice Muhammad Qasim Khan, in his dissent ruled that the impugned order of the trial court to the extent of non-summoning the respondents/politicians was against the law as sufficiency of material available on file had not been properly appreciated.

The judge remanded the case to the trial court with direction to determine falsehood or truthfulness of allegations leveled in the complaint as it might hold further inquiry into the matter or get it investigated through any person/agency or a team of experts, as the investigation by police officers did not appear to be appropriate exercise for the reason that number of police officers were involved in the case and had already been summoned.

QADRI TO MOVE SC: PAT chief Tahirul Qadri has announced that the party will move the Supreme Court against the LHC verdict.

He said the dissenting note in the case had lot of material, which substantiated the PAT point of view.

“On the basis of this, the PAT thinks it has sufficient material to move to the Supreme Court and it was going there for justice,” he said.

The evidence against politicians was stronger than the police officials summoned by the trial court, he said.

Citing the (Justice) Baqar Najafi Report, he said former chief minister Shahbaz Sharif himself had admitted that he came to know about the incident by 9am and directed his principle secretary to tell police to step back.

Published in Dawn, September 27th, 2018