Islamabad court rejects police request to extend Shahbaz Gill’s physical remand

By Muhammad JuniadPublished On 04 Jan 2023

A district and sessions court in Islamabad on Friday rejected the police’s request to extend PTI leader Shahbaz Gill’s physical remand and sent him to jail on judicial remand.

Gill was arrested on Tuesday afternoon at Banigala Chowk in the capital after a video clip of his remarks made about the army went viral on social media. He was subsequently booked under charges of sedition and inciting the public against the state institutions.

On Thursday, another charge of disappearing evidence and giving false information was added to the first information report registered against Gill, officials from capital police told Dawn.

Gill was presented before judicial magistrate Umar Shabbir today upon the expiry of his two-day physical remand, while PTI members gathered outside the court and raised slogans in Gill’s favour.

Application for extension of physical remand

When the hearing began, the investigating officer (IO) submitted an application to the court seeking the extension of Gill’s physical remand by 12 days.

According to the court order, a copy of which is available with Dawn.com, the IO stated in the application that Gill had made disclosures during the course of investigation and revealed that his mobile phone contained data regarding the commission of the offence.

“But he is intentionally causing hindrance in the progress of the matter,” the order said, quoting the application.

The order further said the court was informed that a transcript of Gill’s remarks aired was obtained from the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority and sent to the Federal Investigation Agency’s cybercirme wing for voice matching, the report for which had come out positive.

But further physical remand was necessary for the arrest of others involved in the offence and the recovery of the mobile phone used by Gill for the commission of the offence, the IO contended, according to the court order.

The “IO has also submitted in his application that the accused is continuously telling lies [and] hence, physical remand may be granted for his polygraph test,” the order read.

The order further stated that Islamabad Advocate General Jahangir Jadoon and Assistant Director Public Prosecutor Naveed Akhtar also argued that although the prosecution had made substantial progress in the investigation during the two days of Gill’s physical remand, it had not been able to recover the PTI leader’s mobile phone, laptop and other digital devices used for the commission of the offence due to the suspect’s non-cooperation.

They contended that the recovery of the said devices was necessary for a “just and fair investigation”.

According to the court order, Jadoon went on to allege that Gill had attended a “special meeting” before joining the bulletin and the “complete transcript of the interview was sent to his mobile phone via Whatsapp.”

Hence, the recovery of Gill’s mobile phone was necessary to reach other suspects and “designers of the entire conspiracy”, he added.

Gill, his lawyers object to application, allege torture

For his part, Gill objected to the IO’s application, claiming that police were “using [the] physical remand only for the purposes of torture”, and that he had been “pressurised” to only give statements of the “prosecution’s liking”.

According to the order, he maintained that no mobile phone was used for, pointing out the remarks during the live transmission were aired on August 8, which was the ninth day of Muharram, when mobile phones services remained suspended.

Instead, Gill said, he was speaking during the news bulletin via the landline phone installed at his Banigala office and therefore, “there is no justification for [the] grant of physical remand”.

“The grant of further remand would only mean handing over the accused in the hands of the police for the purposes of further torture,” the order read, attributing the statement to Gill.

While presenting their arguments, lawyers part of Gill’s legal team — namely Faisal Chaudhry, Syed Muhammad Ali Bukhari and Niazullah Niazi — also objected to the request for the extension of their client’s physical remand.

They, too, maintained that the case’s investigation had been completed and the extension was only being sought “for the purposes of torture upon the accused and to get a statement of their liking”.

According to the court order, the lawyers argued that the matter was a case “political vicitmisation” and the “prosecution is only throwing a wider net”, which was evident by the registration of an FIR against Gill’s driver and his family members.

Among Gill’s lawyers, Bukhari drew the court’s attention to the statutory provisions regulating the grant of a remand and judicial precedents wherein these provisions were interpreted by the Supreme Court to support his arguments.

Keeping Gill in custody for phone’s recovery ‘not justified’: court

Based on these arguments, Judge Shabbir observed that since police had already obtained the video and audio of Gill’s remarks and the results of the voice matching test had been received, the investigation of the case had, in fact, been completed and there was no need for an extension of the suspect’s physical remand.

In his order, he further stated stated as far as the grant of physical remand for the recovery of Gill’s mobile phone was concerned, police records showed the suspect had revealed that his phone was with his driver.

Police had already initiated proceedings against the driver, who was at large, and registered a case against him, the judge said, adding that therefore, keeping Gill in custody for the recovery of his phone was “not justified”.

The judge also observed that while Gill maintained that his remarks during the bulletin were made via the landline phone installed at his Banigala office on Muharram 9, when mobile phone services were suspended, police had not obtained any details from the channel about the phone number used for the conversation.

“Police have not brought on record any evidence or investigation to suggest that the cellular network mobile phone was used by the accused for communication,” Judge Shabbir observed and concluded: “In these circumstances, the hunt for mobile phone from the accused is beyond any understanding and legal justification.”

Gill’s controversial comments

Earlier this week, the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra) had issued a show-cause notice for airing comments from Gill, that it said were “highly hateful and seditious” remarks tantamount to “incite armed forces towards revolt”.

The notice went on to say that Gill was invited via a telephonic call for his comments and during his talk with the channel, Gill had alleged that the government was trying to provoke the lower and middle tier of the army against the PTI, saying the families of such “rank and file” support Imran Khan and his party “which is fuelling rage within the government”.

He had also alleged that the “strategic media cell” of the ruling PML-N was spreading false information and fake news to create divisions between PTI chief Imran Khan and the armed forces.

Gill had said the government leaders, including Javed Latif, Defence Minister Khawaja Asif and former National Assembly speaker Ayaz Sadiq, had lambasted the army in the past “and they were at the government positions now”.

“The statement made by the guest is a violation of Article 19 of the Constitution as well as Pemra laws. Airing of such content on your news channel shows either weak editorial control on the content or the licensee is intentionally indulged in providing its platform to such individuals who intend to spread malice and hatred against state institutions for their vested interests,” the watchdog stated.

“Dr Gill tried to malign the federal government, claiming the government functionaries are spearheading a campaign through social media cell for propagating anti-army narrative,” the authority said.