DAG given time for preparation in extradition case

ISLAMABAD   –  The Islamabad Excessive Court docket (IHC) on Monday gave time to Deputy Lawyer Common for preparation of listening to in an Intra Court docket Attraction (ICA) in opposition to extradition of a Pakistani origin US nationwide Talha Haroon allegedly concerned in hatching conspiracy to hold out terrorism exercise in New York in US.

A Division Bench of IHC comprising Appearing Chief Justice Aamer Farooq and Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb performed listening to of the petition whereby the defence counsel had accomplished his arguments whereas a Deputy Lawyer Common resumed his arguments on this matter on Monday.

Nonetheless, he couldn’t fulfill the court docket on the observations made by the Bench on the earlier listening to and gave him time to seek the advice of Lawyer Common on this matter.

After issuing aforementioned instructions, the IHC bench deferred listening to on this reference to date in workplace.

Through the earlier listening to, Justice Maingul Hassan had noticed that the offences with which the accused has been charged should not extradition offences as a result of they’re neither talked about within the treaty nor within the schedule of the act.  He added that how an individual will be surrendered to a different nation who has been charged for non-extraditable offences and directed the Deputy Lawyer Common to fulfill the court docket on this level.

Within the petition, petitioner’s counsel acknowledged that the appellant, being aggrieved of the discovering of inquiry officer and order of the Ministry of Inside, filed a petition earlier than the IHC which vide a judgment dated 03.05.2019, disposed of the identical with a course to inquiry officer to conclude the inquiry inside a interval of 60 days, afresh. Therefore, he has filed this intra court docket attraction in opposition to the aforementioned judgment. He added that the petition filed by the appellants was disposed of by the realized single choose with none course or order for discharging and releasing the appellant’s son.   “It is rather pertinent to say right here the moment attraction is to the extent of discharging and releasing the accused, significantly, when the realized single choose after listening to the case at size arrived on the conclusion that the case was of no proof and no matter appended with the prison grievance was not admissible.

Then it’s categorically clear {that a} prima facie case was not made out in help of the requisition for surrendering of the appellant No. 2 (Talha Haroon) as was requested by the US authorities and ultimately the realized single choose ought to have discharged and launched the appellant as warranted by the legislation on the subject material, mentioned the ICA.

Petitioner’s counsel Idrees Ashraf Advocate adopted within the ICA that the realized single choose has failed in appreciating the purpose, concerning admissibility of proof, raised earlier than him.  It was contended that extradition request being defective couldn’t be granted as a result of the proof connected with the prison grievance was completely inadmissible both being rumour or within the type of affidavits which had been inadmissible until the deponents had been produced for cross examination. 

The realized single choose by means of the impugned judgment has examined the latter a part of the rivalry regarding affidavits however completely ignored the primary a part of the rivalry which was about rumour.

He added that it is vitally respectfully submitted that as per prison grievance the appellant is a high-level goal and energetic member of ISIS however it is vitally shocking that the requesting State has not positioned any proof regarding the connections of the appellant with the IS. 

The counsel continued that it is usually submitted that the entire case revolves round encrypted digital communications however no Web Protocol (IP) deal with of appellant’s laptop computer has been talked about within the grievance to determine that the instrument by means of which the communications had been made belongs to the appellant.

He contended that the realized single choose has failed in contemplating, deliberating and giving discovering on the truth that Talha Haroon was not arrested in accordance with the provisions contained in Part 5 and Part eight of the Extradition Act, 1972.  The respondents made a false assertion by means of reply by stating that Talha Haroon was arrested in pursuant to the Warrants of Arrest issued by the Enquiry Justice of the Peace on 18.11.2016.

The very fact of the matter is that the Appellant No. 2 was picked up by the safety businesses in Quetta.  He remained lacking for nearly three months and confronted brutal torture.

The respondents took this matter very casually and didn’t shy to file reply containing incorrect date of the arrest of the Appellant. 

That is additionally shocking that the Constitutional courts which guard the life and liberty of individuals or residents has ignored this level.

Subsequently, he prayed to the court docket that the impugned judgment to the extent of contemporary resolution of enquiry Justice of the Peace might kindly be suspended.

He additional requested to launch Talha Haroon from custody pending adjudication of the moment attraction.





































































picture supply

le = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

free web hosting site

Leave a Reply

Back to top button

Adblock Detected

Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker