The Peshawar High Court has issued a detailed four-page written judgment on petitions filed by leaders of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) seeking protective bail, recommending the formation of a larger bench to hear such cases.<\/p>\n
In its written decision, the court noted that the Federal Prosecutor General had raised serious objections, arguing that petitioners were repeatedly approaching the court for the same type of relief, which amounted to misuse of the judicial process.<\/p>\n
The judgment pointed out that PTI leader Asad Qaiser had obtained protective bail but failed to appear before the relevant courts, despite being granted relief. The court further observed that petitioners often remain on bail for extended periods without joining investigations, a practice described as contrary to legal requirements.<\/p>\n
The Federal Prosecutor General also argued that there was no uniform policy among courts regarding the grant of protective or transit bail, which, he said, conflicted with judgments of the Supreme Court.<\/p>\n
Taking note of these concerns, the Peshawar High Court directed that the matter be referred to the Chief Justice of the Peshawar High Court for the constitution of a larger bench to examine the issue.<\/p>\n
The court also directed the Federal Prosecutor General to provide the petitioners with complete details of all cases registered against them within seven days. It warned that any misuse of court orders would result in legal action under the law.<\/p>\n
In addition, the court strictly instructed the petitioners not to use judicial relief for protests or activities deemed anti-state. It stressed that court relief must be exercised strictly within the bounds of law, warning that violations could lead to serious legal consequences.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Peshawar High Court has issued a detailed four-page written judgment on petitions filed by leaders of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) seeking protective bail, recommending the formation of a larger bench to hear such cases. In its written decision, the court noted that the Federal Prosecutor General had raised serious objections, arguing that petitioners were repeatedly […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":69671,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[30,16],"tags":[103],"ppma_author":[213],"class_list":{"0":"post-69670","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-latest","8":"category-pakistan","9":"tag-top-stories"},"yoast_head":"\n