ISLAMABAD: Former Prime Minister Imran Khan has filed a bail petition in the Supreme Court of Pakistan, challenging the Lahore High Court’s (LHC) refusal to grant bail in the May 9 riots conspiracy case. His counsel, Salman Safdar, submitted the petition, arguing that the prosecution’s claims lack consistency and legal credibility. Multiple courts have previously dismissed these accusations.
📝 Inconsistent Prosecution Claims Rejected by Courts
The petition dismantles three conflicting narratives used to link Khan with the events:
1. May 7 Conspiracy at Zaman Park
Initially, prosecutors stated that Khan conspired at his residence in Zaman Park, Lahore on May 7, 2023. However, the Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC-III), Lahore rejected this version due to delayed disclosure and lack of credible testimony.
✅ On March 1, 2024, the court granted Khan pre-arrest bail in FIR Nos. 366/23 and 1078/23.
2. Media Statements as Evidence
The prosecution later claimed that Khan’s media appearances incited violence. In response, the LHC ruled that no solid evidence supported this argument and dismissed it entirely.
3. Fresh Testimonies From Party Leaders
Finally, a third version centered around new statements from PTI leaders like Sadaqat Abbasi and Wasiq Qayyum. However, ATC-I Rawalpindi found this testimony unreliable. On August 20, 2024, the court dismissed charges in a similar case involving Bushra Bibi.
⚖️ LHC’s Decision Based on Previously Discredited Statements
Despite repeated rejections by lower courts, the LHC still relied on testimonies from Inspector Asmat Kamal and ASI Hassam Afzal. These same individuals had already been deemed unreliable during earlier bail hearings.
The petition states that the LHC inconsistently evaluated these testimonies and essentially filled gaps left by the prosecution, which it had no authority to do.
❌ Prosecutors Introduced a New Explanation—Too Late
In a surprising move, the LHC accepted a new prosecution claim stating that abetment was recorded on May 4, not May 7. This detail had never surfaced in earlier hearings across any judicial forum.
“This explanation appears for the first time in the impugned order, without any supporting evidence,” reads the petition.
This move, as per the petition, violates judicial standards by introducing untested claims without proper scrutiny.
🚨 Petition Alleges Political Targeting of Imran Khan
According to Khan’s legal team, the case reflects political persecution, not justice. He remained in Adiala Jail for over 14 months, and during that time, authorities made no effort to arrest him under this charge.
The petition suggests that this delay indicates intentional state harassment rather than a genuine legal need for detention.
🔍 Why Bail Should Be Granted: Legal Grounds Back It
Several prior rulings support Khan’s eligibility for bail. These include:
✅ May 2, 2025: The Supreme Court granted post-arrest bail to Ejaz Chaudhary in a similar case, citing further inquiry and delay in evidence production.
✅ March 1, 2024: ATC-III Lahore approved Khan’s pre-arrest bail in two May 9 FIRs.
✅ November 8, 2024: He also received post-arrest bail in four related cases, none of which have been appealed.
Such judgments, according to the petition, clearly establish that Khan’s case merits bail under Section 497(2) CrPC, which deals with cases requiring further legal investigation.
✅ Final Argument: Pattern of Judicial Support Strengthens Imran Khan’s Case
The petition stresses that Imran Khan received bail in 21 similar cases related to the May 9 events. All of them involved the same or similar evidence.
“Courts like the LHC, ATC Lahore, and ATC Rawalpindi have raised consistent doubts about the prosecution’s narrative,” the petition concludes.
