Judicial Magistrate Malik Aman grants two-day physical remand of Dr. Shahbaz Shabbir Gill


ISLAMABAD, August 22 (SABAH): Judicial Magistrate Malik Aman on Monday granted police custody of Dr. Shabaz Shabbir Gill until August 24, after hearing the lawyers’ arguments in a plea against the 48-hour physical remand of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) leader, who has been arrested in connection with a sedition case registered against him. The court has directed the police to present Shahbaz Gill in court on 24th August along with progress report regarding the investigations conducted from him.

Earlier on Monday, court had directed authorities to present Gill, who had been shifted to the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) on Friday.

The court had previously concluded that Gill’s two-day remand in police custody, which was to end on Friday, began late and as such remained incomplete. However, in light of reports on Gill’s health and alleged torture, the court had suspended his handing over to the police.

Judicial Magistrate Malik Aman presided over Monday’s hearing during which Shahbaz Gill took the stand and asked the judge to see all that has been happening with him.

The judge asked Gill whether he had gotten himself examined by doctors. The PTI leader replied that he had been on a hunger strike since last night and was not being allowed to meet anyone.

He claimed that six to seven people had also tried to “force-feed” him at 3am. Gill alleged that he was also “tied down and shaved” by 10 to 12 men.

Gill’s lawyer said that the PTI leader was not being allowed to meet with his legal counsels despite the IHC’s earlier orders.

“Where is the order of the IHC? I will give my verdict after looking at that,” the judge remarked. During the proceedings, he also noted that Gill’s health appeared to have “improved”.

The judge also enquired about the whereabouts of the case file and investigation record. He expressed anger that Gill was presented before the court but the case file was missing.

“The record is with the IHC since it has reserved the verdict,” Gill’s lawyer Faisal Fareed Chaudhry informed the judge, requesting the court to adjourn the hearing for some time. He was referring to the IHC taking up Gill’s plea against his physical remand.

The judge asked Faisal Chaudhry if the hearing should be adjourned till the case file arrived to which the lawyer said to wait till 2pm. The judge subsequently ordered adjourned the hearing.

When the hearing resumed after 1:30pm, Gill’s lawyers Faisal Chaudhry and Babar Awan also arrived in the court. Chaudhry told the court that police were asking for Gill’s physical remand just so that they could torture him more.

The judge pointed out that he had been informed that the investigation officer and the record were at the IHC to which Awan responded that no investigation record was present with the high court.

Awan said that only the writ petition was with the IHC and that he wanted to bring some new facts to light. The lawyers requested that Gill be presented in court until the case record did not arrive since they wanted to meet him.

The judge pointed out that Gill had already met with his lawyers when he was produced earlier in court but Awan insisted that he and Chaudhry also wanted to meet with the PTI leader.

At one point, the judge asked Chaudhry to inform him about the case history.

“A script was concocted from three sources to register the case,” Chaudhry said, adding that Gill remained under investigation for two days and another case was registered on August 11.

“This case mentions a mobile phone. A raid was launched and the wife of [Gill’s] driver was picked up,” Chaudhry said, further explaining that it had been 15 days since the case was registered yet the interim challan had not been filed.

“Gill has been in their custody since day one. Police were stationed at the hospital after installing barbed wires. Videos continued to be filmed inside PIMS and Gill gave a statement saying he was stripped naked and tortured,” the lawyer said.

The judge asked whether Chaudhry had informed the court of these arguments, to which he replied in the affirmative.

Awan said that Gill had been in Islamabad police’s custody for 13 days and it was not known where he was kept during that period. “This is the third round of remand that has started,” he added.

Awan said there was “no doubt” that Gill had given a beeper through a telephone, referring to his comments on ARY News.

“Shahbaz Gill was tortured in these 14 days. [His] video was leaked. He is a professor, a citizen of the United States [and] his wife is also a professor,” the Awan asserted.

He went on to say that Gill was stripped naked, adding that he did not want to say anything more than that. The PTI’s legal team also submitted Gill’s medical report to the court.

During his arguments, Special Prosecutor Raja Rizwan Abbasi argued that Gill’s physical remand had not started due to his two-day stay at Pims. “I do not support physical torture. Physical remand will begin when the court issues the order,” Abbasi said. The court then reserved its verdict after Abbasi completed his arguments.

Separately Acting Chief Justice Amir Farooq heard the petition filed by the lawyers of Shehbaz Gill against granting two-day physical remand by Additional Sessions Judge Zeba Chaudhry, in which Advocate General Islamabad (AGI) Barrister Jehangir Khan Jadoon raised the issue of Imran Khan’s statement and said that the PTI Chairman “gave a statement against an additional session judge”. “We are aware,” Justice Farooq however responded, “we will see to that, [but] that is a separate issue”

“Whether the case is of [Section] 302 or that of terrorism, the court must ensure the protection of rights,” he remarked as he directed Shabaz Gill’s lawyer Salman Safdar to present his arguments.

Advocate Safdar said that his client “was subjected to the worst torture in police custody” and told the court that “signs of physical torture cannot last over five or six days”.

The judge nonetheless asked the advocate to inform the court about “the FIR and the medical report”

Upon this, the report of IG Islamabad regarding the allegations of torture on Shahbaz Gul was submitted while the investigating officer of the case appeared before the court.

“Now his injuries have healed and so videos are being leaked,” the lawyer continued apparently accepting the videos circulating on social media as legitimate.

“We will see to the [matter of] torture and medical report,” Justice Farooq responded as he directed the lawyer to restrict himself to his arguments.

Gill’s counsel then brought up the matter of the recovery of his client’s mobile phone that had been “cited as the reason for further remand” but pointed out that it had already been argued that the device was with Gill’s driver. “The police have acquired the mobile phone” he claimed.

After Gill’s lawyer completed his arguments, special prosecutor Rizwan Abbasi told the court that “the lawyers of the accused cannot be told about the police diaries.”

“The law says that only the court can see the diaries. The reason for not showing them the diaries is that they might destroy the evidence if they find out first,” he explained.

“90 per cent of the investigation is yet to be conducted” he argued claiming that the mobile phone had still not been recovered.

The court inquired why the phone is required, upon which the investigating officer clarified that Gill had revealed during the investigation that “he had read the comments he made during the TV show off of his phone” and that the device was crucial to investigate “who else was involved”.

The special prosecutor also revealed that the accused had said “he needed some time before he could answer” the investigation team’s questions but then he was sent to jail and the investigation was therefore incomplete.

The lawyer also informed the court that while an investigation can be carried out while the accused is in jail, recovery is not possible without completing a separate application process. He also assured the court that rules and regulations were in place to protect the health of an accused should they fall ill during investigation and that if an investigation is not completed within 15 days then further physical remand cannot be granted. Any further investigation would have to take place from within the jail he said.

A response was also submitted by the Adiala Jail authorities regarding the delay in the extradition of Shahbaz Gill which stated that the delay was on account of the medical officer. The jail authorities claimed that the accused had suffered “an asthma attack”.

“Islamabad does not have its own jail,” the authorities explained, “so the accused have to be kept in Adiala jail. If the accused is unwell, they are taken to the nearest hospital.”

On this, the IHC said that if the accused is from Islamabad, they are kept in Islamabad hospital.

On the completion of the arguments of the parties on the application against Shahbaz Gill’s physical remand, lawyer Babar Awan argued that “14 days have been completed since the arrest”. He contended that the custody of the accused begins from the day of the arrest.

The court expressed displeasure as the lawyers continued to speak despite orders to restrain them and reserved its judgment. After completion of the arguments of both parties Justice Aamer Farooq reserved the judgment on the petition.