Imran's physical remand plea rejected
The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected the Punjab government's plea for the physical remand of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf founder Imran Khan.
A three-member SC bench headed by Justice Hashim Kakar heard the case.
The Punjab government's counsel argued that physical remand of the accused was necessary to conduct photogrammetric analysis, polygraph testing, and voice matching.
Justice Hashim Kakar observed that the appeals were filed solely for the physical remand of the accused, noting that no request for any tests had been made. He questioned why the Punjab government was seeking physical remand after a delay of one and a half years, adding that at this stage, there was no justification to grant such a request.
The special prosecutor said the PTI founder was not cooperating with the investigating team.
Justice Kakar remarked as to what kind of cooperation is required from an accused incarcerated in prison. The judge suggested that the test could be conducted after seeking permission from a trial court.
The special prosecutor said the investigating team went to jail to grill the PTI founder on July 14, 2024 but the accused refused to cooperate. He said Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram record contains the messages of the PTI founder that threatened to hold protests if Imran Khan was arrested.
Justice Salah Uddin Panhwar remarked if these messages are saved in a USB device, get the forensic done. He observed that the police do not conduct such tests in an ordinary murder case, asking why police fail to be that active in ordinary murder cases.
Justice Kakar said if the court makes any observation, it will affect the trial.
Later, the court dismissed two appeals filed by the Punjab government for Imran's physical remand.
The court remarked that the prosecution is free to move the trial court for polygraph, photogrammetric and voice matching tests. It also observed that the legal team of the PTI founder could raise legal and factual objections on such an appeal in the trial court.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
5 hours ago
- Express Tribune
The rot that killed Sana Yousaf was never hiding
They say history is a great teacher. Unless, of course, we are talking about the treatment of women in Pakistan. In that case, the lessons rarely seem to stick. It is not that we forget what happened. In fact, on May 20 when the Supreme Court upheld Zahir Jaffer's death sentence, we proudly reposted '#JusticeForNoor'. We like the same photo of Zainab Ansari that makes the rounds on social media on her death anniversary, as many still comment that her killer should have been publicly hanged. We even speak of Qandeel Baloch's name with bated breath, recounting how unfortunate it was every time we see her picture make it back to our timeline. And now, we chant for 17-year-old Sana Yousaf. We demand the harshest punishment for her killer, calling for his swift execution, insisting that he be made an example of. We post her pictures with teary captions, share videos of her smiling, and ask: how a girl so young could be taken so violently. Outrage, by now, is a choreography we have learned by heart. And we really do mean it. And still, there is always another girl. And then another. And then another. And make no mistake, there always will be. Because ours is not a history of lessons learned - it is rot that keeps returning, like a cancer that festers in any corner it can find. 'Jaisi karni, waisi bharni' Allow us to demonstrate. On June 3, just hours after it was confirmed that Sana's murder was an act of hatred by Umar Hayat for rejecting his 'friendship' proposal, social media was flooded with supportive comments. However, as the story goes, the sceptics eventually began to creep. One comment appeared. Then another. Then a third. But why was she on TikTok to begin with? Where are her parents? She must have had some involvement in this. So, what started as a clear case of rage on femicide by any definition of the word, swiftly flattened into a PR-friendly lecture on how girls should behave. Inevitably, rolling the red carpet for everyone's favorite pseudo-moralists, who, true to form, reach for their most iron-clad, tight-fisted defence: the Islam card. This ranged from throwaway one-liners about the necessity of modesty, casually dropped into comment sections, to full-blown fanatics spewing the most vile vitriol, calling for the swift 'erasure' (being generous here) of all such women, because they are the ones spreading 'fahaashi', leading society astray and betraying the word of God. Ironically, they consistently fail to acknowledge what Islam actually teaches: that there is no compulsion in religion, that justice is sacred, and that the burden of wrongdoing lies not on the victim, but the oppressor. But nuance, of course, rarely trends. Neither does picking a side, because celebrities with mammothian platforms, sweeped in at just the right time to provide half-baked statements of condemnation while simultaneously preaching the dangers of social media, the importance of privacy, and how young girls should be careful. Only a few and far between had the courage to call a spade a spade: a man felt entitled to a girl's life and he took it. It is not just the social media echo chamber that is pushing this narrative, too. Just last week, Justice Ali Baqir Najafi stood in the Supreme Court, following Jaffer's sentencing and described Noor's case as a warning against live-in relationships. Unfortunate and disgusting sure, but a cautionary tale, nevertheless. And so, the case of a woman who was tortured, killed, and beheaded became, somehow, a parable about lifestyle choices inviting danger. And the cancer does not stop at the courtroom. We saw this unfold in real time with the Dua Zehra case, where large media outlets and mainstream journalists after expressing their concerns, speculated on her character, questioned her sanity, painted her as rebellious, and amplified every salacious detail they could find. Our silent complicity Perhaps the most devastating betrayal comes when these words are repeated by our own. At the dinner table, the cancer lives in our mothers, who mourn the news as it plays on the television and then reinforce this is why girls should stay home. It grows in our grandmothers, who agree with them, sighing 'in my day girls stayed quiet.' It breathes in our cousin commenting, 'this happens when girls don't stay within their limits'. It thrives in phrases like, 'apni izzat apne haath' (you are the guardian of your own honour). Undeniably, while there is some truth to the notion that we have a degree of control over the respect we receive from those around us, more often than not, this phrase is used in a deceptive way to teach young girls something far more insidious. It becomes a subtle, almost palatable way of implying: 'What happened to you is sad but if you hadn't done this or that, you wouldn't have invited this trouble; maybe you could have saved yourself.' So the point we arrive at is this: despite what we like to tell ourselves, these are not bad apples, or an 'uneducated' few. This is the symptom of a society suspended in a coma, where shock is expected, but action is absent. Each time a woman's name becomes a headline, we jolt awake, shaken by our anger; we post tributes, we write captions, until slowly slipping back into a familiar sleep. The truth is, we live in a state of denial, of the unique willful kind, where we have learned to perform our grief. Public mourning has become our substitute for justice and expressions of solidarity have become our excuse to avoid confronting the systems and this has allowed this violence to happen again and again. Perhaps, at this point, this has paralysingly become our only choice. But at the very least, let us not pretend to be surprised. Let us not mourn Sana as if her death was unprecedented or unthinkable. The cancer that led us here is not new and it is not hiding. It has baked into our institutions, families, conversations and media. And it is now convincing us that our grief is enough. Which, for the record, it never was, and it never will be. Have something to add to the story? Share it in the comments below.
Business Recorder
5 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Trump reinstates US travel ban, bars citizens of 12 countries; Pakistan not included
WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump signed a proclamation on Wednesday banning the citizens of 12 countries from entering the United States, saying the move was needed to protect against 'foreign terrorists' and other security threats. The directive is part of an immigration crackdown Trump launched this year at the start of his second term, which has also included the deportation to El Salvador of hundreds of Venezuelans suspected of being gang members, as well as efforts to deny enrollments of some foreign students and deport others. The countries affected by the latest travel ban are Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. The entry of people from seven other countries: Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela, will be partially restricted. 'We will not allow people to enter our country who wish to do us harm,' Trump said in a video posted on X. He said the list could be revised and new countries could be added. The proclamation is effective on June 9, 2025 at 12:01 am EDT (0401 GMT). Visas issued before that date will not be revoked, the order said. During his first term in office, Trump announced a ban on travelers from seven Muslim-majority nations, a policy that went through several iterations before it was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018. Former President Joe Biden, a Democrat who succeeded Trump, repealed that ban on nationals from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen in 2021, calling it 'a stain on our national conscience.' Trump said the countries subject to the most severe restrictions were determined to harbor a 'large-scale presence of terrorists,' fail to cooperate on visa security and have an inability to verify travelers' identities, inadequate record-keeping of criminal histories and high rates of visa overstays in the United States. Trump administration weighs travel ban on many countries including Pakistan 'We cannot have open migration from any country where we cannot safely and reliably vet and screen those who seek to enter the United States,' Trump said. He cited Sunday's incident in Boulder, Colorado in which a man tossed a gasoline bomb into a crowd of pro-Israel demonstrators as an example of why the new restrictions are needed. An Egyptian national, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, has been charged in the attack. Federal officials said Soliman had overstayed his tourist visa and had an expired work permit - although Egypt is not on the list of countries facing travel limits. Being in the US a 'big risk' Somalia immediately pledged to work with the U.S. to address security issues. 'Somalia values its longstanding relationship with the United States and stands ready to engage in dialogue to address the concerns raised,' Dahir Hassan Abdi, the Somali ambassador to the United States, said in a statement. Venezuelan Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello, a close ally of President Nicolas Maduro, responded on Wednesday evening by describing the U.S. government as fascist and warning Venezuelans of being in the U.S. 'The truth is being in the United States is a big risk for anybody, not just for Venezuelans … They persecute our countrymen, our people for no reason.' A spokesperson for the Taliban-led Afghan foreign ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Pakistan's foreign ministry did not immediately reply to a request for comment on how it would handle the thousands of Afghans waiting in Islamabad who had been in the pipeline for U.S. resettlement. Calls early on Thursday to the spokesperson of Myanmar's military government were not answered. The travel ban threatens to upend a 31-year-old Myanmar teacher's plan to join a U.S. State Department exchange program, which was slated to start in September. 'It is not easy to apply nor get accepted as we needed several recommendation letters,' said the teacher, who currently lives in Thailand and asked not to be named because her visa application is still outstanding. 'In my case, I would get to work at universities that provide digital education,' she said, adding that she had not been updated by the program after Trump's announcement. Trump's presidential campaign focused on a tough border strategy and he previewed his plan in an October 2023 speech, pledging to restrict people from the Gaza Strip, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen and 'anywhere else that threatens our security.' Trump issued an executive order on January 20 requiring intensified security vetting of any foreigners seeking admission to the U.S. to detect national security threats. The latest travel restrictions were first reported by CBS News. In March, Reuters reported that the Trump administration was considering travel restrictions on dozens of countries.
Express Tribune
11 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Trump imposes new US travel ban on 12 nations
Afghan refugees queue outside a distribution and donation center at Liberty Village on Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in New Jersey, U.S., December 2, 2021. REUTERS/Barbara Davidson/Pool/File photo Listen to article US President Donald Trump signed a proclamation on Wednesday banning the nationals of 12 countries from entering the United States, saying the move was needed to protect against "foreign terrorists" and other security threats. The directive is part of an immigration crackdown Trump launched this year at the start of his second term, which has also included the deportation to El Salvador of hundreds of Venezuelans suspected of being gang members and efforts to deny enrollments of some foreign students and deport others. The countries affected by the latest travel ban are Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. The entry of people from seven other countries: Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela, will be partially restricted. "We will not allow people to enter our country who wish to do us harm," Trump said in a video posted on X. He said the list could be revised and new countries could be added. "We cannot have open migration from any country where we cannot safely and reliably vet and screen... That is why today I am signing a new executive order placing travel restrictions on countries including Yemen, Somalia, Haiti, Libya, and numerous others." –President Trump — The White House (@WhiteHouse) June 4, 2025 The proclamation is effective on June 9, 2025 at 12:01 am EDT (0401 GMT). Who does it apply to? The proclamation states that the full and partial travel bans apply to foreign nationals of the designated countries who: - are outside the United States on June 9, and - do not have a valid visa on June 9 The proclamation also states: No immigrant or non-immigrant visa issued before June 9 "shall be revoked pursuant to this proclamation." Are there any exceptions to the trave bans? Exceptions to the travel ban include: - Any lawful permanent resident of the United States - Dual nationals - Diplomats traveling on valid non-immigrant visas - Athletes or members of an athletic team and immediate relatives, traveling for the World Cup, Olympics, or other major sporting event - Immediate family immigrant visas - Adoptions - Afghan Special Immigrant Visas - Special Immigrant Visas for United States government employees - Immigrant visas for ethnic and religious minorities facing persecution in Iran During his first term in office, Trump announced a ban on travelers from seven Muslim-majority nations, a policy that went through several iterations before it was upheld by the Supreme Court in 2018. Former President Joe Biden, a Democrat who succeeded Trump, repealed that ban on nationals from Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen in 2021, calling it "a stain on our national conscience." Trump said the countries subject to the most severe restrictions were determined to harbor a "large-scale presence of terrorists," fail to cooperate on visa security and have an inability to verify travelers' identities, inadequate record-keeping of criminal histories and high rates of visa overstays in the United States. "We cannot have open migration from any country where we cannot safely and reliably vet and screen those who seek to enter the United States," Trump said. He cited Sunday's incident in Boulder, Colorado in which an Egyptian national, Mohamed Sabry Soliman, has been charged in the attack. Federal officials said Soliman had overstayed his tourist visa and had an expired work permit - although Egypt is not on the list of countries facing travel limits. Somalia immediately pledged to work with the US to address security issues. "Somalia values its longstanding relationship with the United States and stands ready to engage in dialogue to address the concerns raised," Dahir Hassan Abdi, the Somali ambassador to the United States, said in a statement. Venezuelan Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello, a close ally of President Nicolas Maduro, responded on Wednesday evening by describing the US government as fascist and warning Venezuelans of being in the US. "The truth is being in the United States is a big risk for anybody, not just for Venezuelans ... They persecute our countrymen, our people for no reason." A spokesperson for the Taliban-led Afghan foreign ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Pakistan's foreign ministry did not immediately reply to a request for comment on how it would handle the thousands of Afghans waiting in Islamabad who had been in the pipeline for US resettlement. Calls early on Thursday to the spokesperson of Myanmar's military government were not answered. The foreign ministry of Laos did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Trump campaigned on a tough border strategy and previewed his plan in an October 2023 speech, pledging to restrict people from Gaza, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen and "anywhere else that threatens our security." Trump issued an executive order on January 20 requiring intensified security vetting of any foreigners seeking admission to the US to detect national security threats. That order directed several cabinet members to submit a list of countries from which travel should be partly or fully suspended because their "vetting and screening information is so deficient."
