- Fashion-designer would have to stay in jail as she has yet to secure bail in another case
LAHORE: An Additional District and Sessions Court here on Wednesday granted post-arrest bail to PTI’s activist and fashion-designer Khadija Shah in the controversial tweets case linked to May 9 riots.
Additional District and Sessions Judge Muhammad Nawaz pronounced the reserved verdict, granting Mrs Shah bail against the surety bonds of Rs100,000.
The designer, however, would have to remain in the jail as she has yet to get bail in another case.
Khadija Shah, a Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) activist and former finance minister Dr Salman Shah’s daughter is currently in jail on judicial remand in Jinnah House attack case following the arrest of former prime minister and PTI chief on May 9.
Violent clashes broke out across Pakistan after the former prime minister and Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf chief Imran Khan was arrested by paramilitary Rangers from the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on May 9.
Earlier, the counsel for Khadija Shah argued that his client had nothing to do with the cases registered against her in connection with the May 9 riots.
He further argued that his client’s repeated arrests showed malafide intent on the part of concerned quarters and implored the court that the petitioner has been granted bail by the Lahore High Court (LHC) in two FIRs in light of the CCPO’s report, submitted before the court, ensuring that only two FIRs had been registered against her.
He added that as she was granted bail in the other two cases, she was arrested in the third case which had not been disclosed before LHC. He argued that a contempt plea is still pending before LHC which Khadija had filed against police officials.
The counsel further implored that Khadija was arrested on different pretexts by either the Punjab police or the FIA but nothing is on record to establish her nexus with the allegations being levelled against her.
He requested the court to grant her bail adding a ‘forged case’ has been registered against her client.
On the other hand, the law officer strongly opposed the version of the petitioner’s counsel arguing that substantial evidence is available to establish the nexus of the petitioner with offences she was accused of and prayed to dismiss her bail plea.
