LAHORE: The Lahore High Court has ruled that a judge before granting physical remand to a suspect should be satisfied about the availability of sufficient incriminating evidence on the record.

“The remand is not to be granted in a mechanical manner on the police request,” said a detailed verdict issued by a division bench on a petition of incarcerated PTI founding chairman Imran Khan challenging his physical remand in 12 cases of May 9 riots.

The bench comprising Justice Tariq Saleem Sheikh and Justice Anwarul Haq Pannun had quashed the remand of the former premier on July 25.

The verdict authored by Justice Pannun said a judge, who grants remand, is under legal duty to satisfy himself if under the circumstances the remand is to be granted or not.

Detailed verdict on Imran’s challenge plea says physical remand is not to be granted mechanically on police request

It said the liberty of a person cannot be curtailed and he has a legal right to explain his point of view before the judge when remand is to be granted.

It observed that passing of the mechanical orders granting physical remand by the magistrate has been deprecated by the superior courts of the country.

About the facts of the case, the bench said the physical remand of the suspect/petitioner had been granted merely on the ground that as per police report he was named for hatching of criminal conspiracy which was disseminated and conveyed through modern devices like mobile phone and audio/video clips.

“We are afraid the learned judge has failed to consider/discuss any incriminating material available with the prosecution constituting the offence of abetment against the accused/petitioner necessitating his physical remand,” the bench observed in the written order.

It noted that the prosecutor general of Punjab had not been able to show any incriminating portions of statements of the suspect constituting an offence except the statement of one police inspector, who along with some other personnel of law-enforcement agency allegedly heard the conspiracy/instigation of the petitioner about the occurrence mentioned in a FIR, wherein pre-arrest bail of the petitioner had been confirmed.

The bench said astonishingly, the police had not shown any reason for making any request to the court seeking physical remand of the suspect in the 12 cases during the period of more than one year when he was not on pre-arrest bail.

On July 15, an anti-terrorism court had granted a 10-day physical remand of Imran Khan to a Joint Investigation Team (JIT) of the police in the May 9 cases including an attack on the corps commander’s house.

The prosecution had not presented Mr Khan physically before the court, and made him attend the remand proceedings through a video call on WhatsApp from Adiala jail, Rawalpindi.

However, Mr Khan challenged his remand before the LHC.

His petition argued that the trial court passed the impugned order by misreading principles established on law of remand.

It stated that the remand of the petitioner was unjustifiable on face of it as the sole allegation against him was of abetment/conspiracy and he was not required for the purpose of investigation as the FIR was wholly silent about his specific role.

Published in Dawn, July 28th, 2024