close
close

SC will not allow further delay in case of PTI polls

SC will not allow further delay in case of PTI polls

ISLAMABAD:

The apex court has refused to further adjourn the hearing of a review petition filed by the PTI against the court’s January 13 order in the intra-party election case, noting that the party is looking for “incumbents” but the court will not give them that. opportunity

Resuming the hearing of the review petition on Friday, a three-member bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Qazi Faez Isa and comprising Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Musarat Hilali expressed annoyance at the absence from any member of the PTI legal team.

During the hearing, neither PTI’s lawyer appeared nor the Advocate on Record. Accused Akbar S Babar’s lawyer Ahmed Hassan informed the court that PTI’s lawyer Hamid Khan had filed an adjournment application.

CJ Isa asked Babar’s counsel to read out paragraph two of the adjournment application, which mentioned Hamid Khan’s family commitments. The CJ remarked that this was a “new” adjournment request and that he had never seen such a request before.

“I have never come across a request for an adjournment made due to family commitments before today. Usually, adjournments are requested in the event of death or illness.”

He said this case was initially scheduled for May 29 list of proposed cases hearing, and lawyer Ali Zafar had asked for a general adjournment to June 4.

“One of the backbenchers had undergone open-heart surgery in the meantime and yet the intra-party election case had been turned into a ‘bat symbol case’ by certain groups.”

And he added: “These critics should read the court’s decision before criticizing it. If they want to spread propaganda, they should do it outside but avoid coming to the court. That would be more appropriate.”

The judge said that these kinds of situations do not occur anywhere else in the world, where a party demands a specific hearing date or court. “Here we cannot create a separate law for anyone. If they do not want the case to continue for ten years, so be it,” he remarked.