The Lahore High Court on Thursday ruled that the prosecution evidence concerning offences attributed to jailed PTI founder Imran Khan in connection with the May 9, 2023, riots amounted to “conspiracy and abetment”.

Following the arrest of the ex-premier on May 9, 2023, from the Islamabad High Court’s (IHC) premises, riots erupted across the country and went on for at least 24 hours. Protesters vandalised and torched government buildings and military installations, while also breaking into the residence of the Lahore corps commander. The state subsequently launched a crackdown against him and his party, filing several other cases against Imran since the events of May 9, in many of which he has been acquitted.

Imran had approached the LHC seeking post-arrest bail in eight cases of the May 9 riots, including an attack on the corps commander’s residence, in January. The other cases involve attacks on Askari Tower at Liberty, PML-N offices in Model Town, Shadman police station, the burning of police vehicles near Jinnah House and violence at Sherpao Bridge. Previously, an antiterrorism court had on Nov 27, 2024, denied bail to the former prime minister in these cases. The LHC had also denied the request last week in a short order.

In their detailed verdict issued today, Justice Syed Shahbaz Ali Rizvi and Justice Tariq Mahmood Bajwa said: “In this view of the matter argument furnished by learned counsel for the petitioner (Imran Khan) to the effect that on May 9, 2023, the petitioner was in jail is of no help to him.”

In its detailed verdict, the bench reproduced the statements of two police officials, the prosecution witnesses, who claimed to have secretly attended the meetings of the PTI wherein the party’s founder allegedly gave instructions to other party leaders to attack military installations in case of his imminent arrest from the IHC.

The bench observed that the statements of the witnesses were not to be termed as belated.

It said the role assigned to the petitioner, evident from the statements of the witnesses, attracted the provisions of Section 120-B (punishment for criminal conspiracy) and 121-A (conspiracy to commit offence of waging or attempting to wage war against the country) of the Pakistan Penal Code.

The bench held that the statements of the witnesses prima facie reflected that the conspiracy and abetment for the offences committed on May 9 were perpetrated by the petitioner on May 4 at Chakri rest area, Rawalpindi, on May 7 and on May 9 at Lahore.

“We have also noticed that the effect of the petitioner’s criminal conspiracy/abetment and the words uttered by him resulted in loss of lives and the state property. The petitioner’s case being the leader of the all co-accused is distinguishable from those who have been granted bail by different courts,” the judges of the bench observed.

The bench noted that the prosecution was equipped with the audio, video clips and transcripts prepared by the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority, which required forensic analysis.

However, it said that despite successive efforts by the investigating officer, Imran had declined to make himself available for the purpose of polygraph and photogrammetric tests, which, prima facie, hindered the process of investigation, reflecting his evasive conduct.

With these observations, the judges observed, “We are not inclined to grant post-arrest bail to the petitioner and being so, this petition is dismissed.”