The PTI chairman was absent from the court proceeding, thus Judge Raja Jawad Abbas of the ATC enquired as to why and in what place he was presently residing.
Judge Abbas was debating the former prime minister’s request for a temporary release on bail in the matter of organising a rally and meddling in public affairs.
Imran is not permitted to enter the federal capital, the court rules
The PTI chairman was in Lahore and wanted to personally appear before the court, but the Islamabad administration was preventing him from entering the capital, according to the PTI chairman’s attorney, Babar Awan.
Imran’s medical records were provided to the court by Awan before he made this argument, alerting it that the PTI leader was hurt and unable to travel.
The court added that this matter cannot be delayed any longer after noting that the former premier was present at a political event [two days ago].
The court questioned Awan over whether he had a written order prohibiting the ousted prime minister from entering Islamabad. The PTI attorney retorted that he did not have the directive in writing and said that it had been delivered verbally.
The case was then postponed till December 9 by the ATC, which instructed Awan to make sure Imran would show up.
The court said it might also request an explanation from the Islamabad government on the former prime minister’s admittance into the nation’s capital.
“Breaking Section 144”
Imran Khan, the head of the PTI, and other party officials were accused by the Islamabad police of breaking Section 144 during their rally in Islamabad in August.
The federal capital police had announced through loudspeakers that Section 144 had been implemented in the city, but the party persisted in holding a rally, according to the first information report (FIR), filed by Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) Muhammad Anwar.
The PTI leader Shahbaz Gill’s detention and “custodial torture” were the reasons the party leaders took part in the demonstration.
The prosecution against the PTI leaders was “baseless,” according to their attorneys, who also claimed that the protest was peaceful and that the cases were a “effort to suppress” the leaders.
