LHC reserves verdict on bail of MNA Ali Wazir’s nephew

LAHORE: The Lahore High Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict on the post-arrest bail petition of student Alamgir Wazir, nephew of MNA and Pashtun Tahaffuz Movement leader Ali Wazir, in a sedition case lodged against him for participating in the Student Solidarity March.

The petitioner’s counsel and an additional prosecutor concluded their arguments before Justice Asjad Javed Ghural who reserved the decision, which is likely to be announced on February 6.

The Civil Lines police had lodged the case against Wazir and other prominent participants of the Student Solidarity March under Section 124-A of the Pakistan Penal Code which deals with the offence of sedition. The FIR also carried Sections 290 (public nuisance) and 291 (continuance of nuisance after injunction to discontinue in addition to offences under Punjab Sound System (Regulations) Act 2015 and Punjab Maintenance of Public Order Ordinance 1960.

Advocate Asad Jamal, on behalf of the petitioner, argued that the allegations leveled in the FIR were absurd, malicious and baseless. He said the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. He pointed out that the offences listed in the FIR are either bailable or carry lesser punishment in which release on bail is a norm rather than exception. He said the most serious offence against the petitioner is Section 124-A of the PPC wherein the superior courts of the country have taken a lenient view regarding release on bail.

The counsel argued that it is a case of further inquiry due to lack of conclusive evidence and the nature of offences. He said the gravity and sensitivity of words spoken can only be assessed at trial and deeper appreciation of evidence is not to be carried out at the bail stage. Jamal said no person should be kept behind the bars or deprived of liberty merely because of registration of FIR as it would amount to punishment without being declared guilty.

Meanwhile, the prosecutor opposed the bail and argued that the petitioner used objectionable language against the state institutions, which is tantamount to disrespecting the country. He said the evidence collected by the police is sufficient to prove the offences committed by the petitioner. He urged the court to dismiss the bail petition.