Special prosecutor defends decision not to include PTI leaders’ names in supplementary challan
KP CM Sohail Afridi. Photo: screenshot
PESHAWAR:
A police officer told an Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) on Tuesday that there was not enough evidence to include the name of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (KP) Chief Minister Sohail Afridi as an accused in the supplementary challan of a case related to an attack on Radio Pakistan Peshawar on May 9, 2023.
Appearing before the ATC chaired by Justice Wali Muhammad, special prosecutor Naumanul Haq Kakakhel said the video evidence used to implicate “certain people” was not sufficient to substantiate the case.
“The footage does not conclusively establish that it depicts the attack on Radio Pakistan. The videos only show similarities and do not definitively prove that they are linked to the attack,” he added.
According to Kakakhel, these elements cannot be considered as solid evidence to name individuals as accused. This is, according to him, a crucial point which hinders further progress in this matter.
During the last hearing of the case on March 11, Radio Pakistan lawyer Shabbir Hussain Gigyani and IO inspector Khushhal Khan filed contempt of court proceedings against the district attorney and senior CTD prosecutor for not submitting the challan in court.
He had told the court that the IO intended to submit an additional challan, including the names of CM Afridi, former ministers Taimur Saleem Jhagra and Kamran Bangash, PTI Peshawar president Irfan Saleem and worker Amir Chamkani, but the district attorney was delaying the matter.
Speaking on the complaint, the Special Prosecutor said a forensic report had been received and he was seeking to submit it with his opinion. He asked the court to review the report and allow the plaintiff’s lawyer to raise objections, if any, in the next hearing.
Radio Pakistan’s lawyer Shabbir Hussain Gigyani reiterated that the prosecution’s refusal to submit the additional challan amounted to obstruction.
Opposing the contempt plea, the special prosecutor argued that the contempt petition was not maintainable and pointed out that under the law, the government had the power to appoint a special prosecutor for such cases. He cited provisions of the 1997 Anti-Terrorism Act saying his role was legally valid.
During the hearing, Advocate General Shah Faisal also appeared and clarified that the government had appointed the special prosecutor in this case in accordance with the legal provisions.
Radio Pakistan’s lawyer argued that investigative powers rested with the district attorney, while the role of the special prosecutor was limited to conducting the trial.
However, the special public prosecutor countered that his appointment gave him authority to act in the case and the court had not specifically ordered the submission of a challan but had only asked for a report, which had already been submitted.
The ATC judge also summoned the district attorney, who informed the court that following the appointment of a special prosecutor, his office’s role in the case had effectively ceased.
After hearing arguments from all parties, the court ordered that any objections to the contempt petition be filed through appropriate motions and adjourned the hearing.
