close
Friday July 12, 2024

IHC seeks reply from Imran’s counsel for not disclosing Tyrian in nomination papers

By Awais Yousafzai
December 21, 2022

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday sought a reply from the counsel of PTI Chairman Imran Khan on a petition seeking his disqualification for allegedly concealing his daughter’s name in the nomination papers.

The Chief Justice, IHC, Aamer Farooq, heard the petition filed by Mohammad Sajid who contended that Imran Khan had mentioned his two sons in the nomination papers but failed to disclose his daughter Tyrian White. He sought the disqualification of the former premier under Article 62(i)(f).

A legal team comprising Salman Akram Raja, Azhar Siddique and Abuzar Salman Niazi represented the PTI chief in the case whereas a lawyer for the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) also attended the hearing.

Making an argument, Salman Akram Raja said that a verdict in an identical case had already been announced. evidences of foreign aid to

the party. What the petitioner wanted in the case, he asked, and said that the federal government was yet to send the reference to the apex court.

The chief justice remarked that the court wanted to conclude the case early but the petitioner could not start its case yet. The court instructed the petitioner to conclude its arguments early and later time would be given to the other side.

Barrister Anwar Mansoor, the PTI’s lawyer, submitted the written arguments before the court and contended that the ECP had no authority to send the matter to the federal government, adding that the ECP had sent the matter to federal government on dissolving the party. He said that opening of cases on the basis of ECP decision was also an illegal act.

Anwar Mansoor said that there was a difference in prohibited funding and foreign aid. He prayed the court to conduct hearing of the case on daily basis. The FIA had registered dozens of FIRs on the basis of ECP verdict, he said.

The bench rejected the PTI’s request to stop the FIA’s action into the matter and remarked that it was a separate issue. Further hearing of the case was then adjourned till January 10.

It may be mentioned here that the ECP had served a show-cause notice to the PTI after prohibited funding was proved against it. The PTI had challenged the decision before the IHC.