LAHORE:
Two anti-terrorism courts (ATCs) in Punjab on Tuesday found dozens of PTI leaders and workers — including Dr Yasmin Rashid, Mian Mahmoodur Rasheed, Umar Sarfraz Cheema, Ejaz Chaudhary and Malik Ahmad Khan Bhachar — guilty of aiding and abetting rioting on May 9, 2023 and sentenced them to various prison terms.
PTI Vice Chairman Shah Mahmood Qureshi was, however, among the few, who were acquitted of charges in one of the cases registered in Lahore.
These were the first verdicts delivered in the rioting cases registered against thousands of PTI leaders, workers and supporters under the country’s anti-terror law following attacks on military installations in various parts of the country after the May 9 arrest of PTI founder Imran Khan.
The verdicts came before completion of the deadline set by the Supreme Court, which on April 8 directed the ATCs to wrap up the May 9 cases in four months — by August.
Earlier in the day, an ATC in Sargodha sentenced 32 people including PTI lawmakers and supporters to 10 years in prison. Punjab Assembly Leader of Opposition Malik Ahmad Khan Bhachar and MNA Muhammad Ahmad Chattha were among those who were found guilty.
In his verdict, ATC Judge Muhammad Naeem Sheikh noted that in such cases of unruly mob, it is very difficult to distinguish between the acts of individual members of a mob, who act in furtherance of the common intention of all.
However, if an act is done by several persons in furtherance of their common intention, each of such persons is liable for that act, which is done by other persons as it is not required that a person should necessarily perform any act with his own hand.
The verdict said that if several persons had the common intention and object of doing a particular criminal act and if in furtherance of that common intention all of them joined together and aided or abetted each other in the commission of an act then every member of the group would be held to have done that act, even of some of them have not committed it with their own hands.
“Hence, the accused facing the trial to whom there is no specific role/attribution are held responsible for all the acts done by their other accused persons in furtherance of common intention and in prosecution of common object,” he said.
The judgement said that no material irregularity or illegality could be pointed out by the defence in the prosecution case, which could be considered sufficient enough to discard and disbelieve the prosecution evidence which in this case can safely be termed as convincing, reliable, confidence inspiring and trustworthy and although.
The order stated that the prosecution witnesses were police officials but their presence at the spot and the evidence furnished by them was quite natural.
“The sequel of this discourse is that the prosecution has been able to bring home charges against all the accused facing the trial beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt, who are, therefore, liable to be convicted accordingly,” it added.
The court declared that it had reached to the conclusion that the accused were guilty of damaging public property, setting buildings on fire, and creating unrest after thorough examination of the evidence, witness statements and police reports.
Mianwali police had registered FIRs against PTI lawmakers, workers and supporters for allegedly creating anarchy, resorting to arson and inciting people after May 9 acts of vandalism.
Earlier, the counsels for accused persons had argued that their clients had nothing to do with these charges which were politically motivated. They had contended that no substantial evidence was available on record to establish their link with the offences outlined in the FIR.
Later on Tuesday night, an ATC in Lahore also sentenced eight PTI leaders including Umar Sarfraz Cheema, Mian Mehmoodur Rasheed, Ejaz Chuadhary, Dr Yasmeen Rashid and others to 10 years in prison for creating anarchy and resorting to arson at Lahore’s Sherpao bridge. The ATC judge, however, acquitted six PTI leaders and workers including Shah Mehmood Qureshi in the same case.
During trial proceedings, the petitioners’ lawyers including Advocate Burhan Mozzam Malik argued that nothing was available on record to establish the link of the accused persons with the charges.
They said clips of the rioting incidents were downloaded from social media and no other details were available on record. They argued that FIRs were registered against PTI’s leaders and workers due to political reasons.
However, the prosecution argued that cogent evidence was available to establish the nexus of the accused persons with the charges levelled in the FIR. They claimed that the accused planned the attacks to create chaos in the country.
Some legal experts believe the verdicts could result in the de-seating of convicted lawmakers.
Responding to the verdict, Punjab Assembly Leader of Opposition Malik Ahmad Khan Bhachar announced that he would challenge the verdict in the May 9 casein the Lahore High Court. “The verdict was delivered in a case based on political motives and was against the Constitution,” he said.
