The defamation case of 10 billion rupees of RS10 billion high-level Rs deposited by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif against the President of Pakistan Tehreek-E-insaf (PTI), Imran Khan, was temporarily suspended due to a failure of power at the court of Horore.
The Prime Minister appeared via a video link for the hearing led by an additional sessions judge. However, the counter-examination was suddenly interrupted due to a power failure, Express News reported.
Earlier at the hearing, Imran Khan’s lawyer Mian Muhammad Hussain Chotya, contrainded the Prime Minister, who was sworn in before testifying.
“I will say the truth and I will not make any false statement,” said Sharif.
During the interrogation, Khan’s lawyer asked if Sharif accepts that his trial had not been filed before a district court but with a district judge, to which the Sharif lawyer prohibited to argue that the case had already been settled.
Imran’s lawyer supported more, noting that no media house was part of the case.
Sharif confirmed it, adding that the defamatory declarations have been broadcast several times on television.
When asked if the allegations had been made face to face, Sharif replied: “This vile accusation was repeated on television several times.”
At one point, Imran’s lawyer asked if he could question in Punjabi, to which Sharif replied: “You are welcome.”
Khan’s lawyer also asked if the television programs in which the charges were broadcast in Islamabad. Sharif replied that he was not aware of the origin of the broadcast.
The counter-examination stopped sudden when the electricity died during the Shari video appearance, which interrupted the procedures.
The Prime Minister said that his legal team had appointed any media, an employee or official as respondents in the case.
He recognized that he had described Khan as a political rival in paragraph 3 of the complaint, but denied that political rivalry justified the exchange of defamatory declarations.
Sharif’s lawyer, Mustafa Ramday, opposed certain legal issues posed by Imran Khan’s lawyer, in particular with regard to the jurisdiction of the court and the role of the additional district judge in the understanding.
The judge canceled the objection and asked Sharif directly if he wanted to answer. Sharif said it was incorrect to claim that an additional district judge could not preside over such a matter or recorded evidence.
The hearing was then postponed until April 25 at 9:00 a.m., when the counter-examination should resume.
