PESHAWAR: A local court here on Saturday put off hearing to March 4 of a defamation suit filed against former premier Imran Khan by an ex-MPA, Fauzia Bibi, who was accused by him of selling her vote in the 2018 Senate elections.

An additional district and sessions judge, Aftab Iqbal, was requested by senior counsel Qazi Mohammad Anwar to allow them at least three weeks’ time as they were engaged in patching up the matter with the plaintiff. The plaintiff’s counsel Syed Ghufranullah Shah appeared along with four of the witnesses in the case.

However, following the request made by the defendant’s counsel, the statements of witnesses were not recorded.

The former MPA, who was elected on reserved seats for women on PTI ticket, has filed the suit for recovery of damages to the tune of Rs500 million for defaming her through levelling “baseless” allegations against her by Mr Khan at a press conference.

Next hearing into petition of ex-MPA fixed for March 4

The defamation suit was filed in June 2018 under the Defamation Ordinance 2002. The only defendant in the suit is PTI chief Imran Khan, who subsequently became prime minister and was then removed through a vote of no-confidence in April 2022.

The former MPA has claimed that in the Senate polls held on March 3, 2018, she had followed the party’s direction with effect to cast vote in favour of all the relevant candidates.

She stated that after the Senate polls, the defendant started uttering, spreading and resorting to publication, communication and circulation of maliciously false, baseless and unfounded oral statements and representation against the plaintiff.

After repeated court notices, a reply was submitted to the plaint in 2021 on behalf of Mr Khan, requesting to dismiss the suit as it was based on malafide and ulterior motives on part of the plaintiff.

In his reply, he stated that the press conference in question addressed by him was based on findings of a fact finding committee and his remarks were made public in good faith.

He had stated that he had not said anything on his own or personal experience but had narrated only the true information provided by the fact finding committee.

He stated that the fact finding committee disclosed to him the names of doubtful MPAs, who had not voted for the party’s candidates as a result of which the candidates had lost the Senate polls.

The defendant contended that the plaintiff did not challenge the action of the fact finding committee and the disciplinary committee before any competent forum, provided under the law governing the affairs of political parties as well as provided in the constitution of PTI.

On December 14, 2019, the court had rejected an application of Mr Khan, seeking dismissal of the suit stating it was not maintainable.

In April 2020, the Peshawar High Court had allowed a petition of the plaintiff and ordered that the case should be disposed of as per section 14 of the Defamation Ordinance, 2002, under which the suit had to be decided within 90 days.

However, the case continued to linger due to one reason or another.

Published in Dawn, February 19th, 2023

Opinion

Editorial

Punishing evaders
02 May, 2024

Punishing evaders

THE FBR’s decision to block mobile phone connections of more than half a million individuals who did not file...
Engaging Riyadh
Updated 02 May, 2024

Engaging Riyadh

It must be stressed that to pull in maximum foreign investment, a climate of domestic political stability is crucial.
Freedom to question
02 May, 2024

Freedom to question

WITH frequently suspended freedoms, increasing violence and few to speak out for the oppressed, it is unlikely that...
Wheat protests
Updated 01 May, 2024

Wheat protests

The government should withdraw from the wheat trade gradually, replacing the existing market support mechanism with an effective new one over the next several years.
Polio drive
01 May, 2024

Polio drive

THE year’s fourth polio drive has kicked off across Pakistan, with the aim to immunise more than 24m children ...
Workers’ struggle
Updated 01 May, 2024

Workers’ struggle

Yet the struggle to secure a living wage — and decent working conditions — for the toiling masses must continue.