RAWALPINDI: The Special Anti-Terrorism Court, Rawalpindi, has dismissed a petition filed by Aleema Khanum—sister of the former chairman and an accused in a case registered at Sadiqabad Police Station over the PTI’s November 26 protest—challenging the court’s jurisdiction.
The court adjourned the hearing till December 4 and summoned the prosecution witnesses for the trial. The petitioner, her counsel, and Special Prosecutor Zaheer Shah appeared before the court during the hearing of the petition filed a day earlier. Presenting arguments, the prosecutor opposed the petition, stating that Section 23 can be invoked at the outset of any case. He argued that since the accused has already been indicted, the jurisdiction cannot be challenged at this stage. He further noted that 12 other accused have confessed before the court, and none has appealed the decision.
The prosecution maintained that the court had already examined the evidence and that the proceedings were legally sound. It argued that the main accused is charged with conspiracy and aiding and abetting—offences that carry heavier penalties, as conspiracy itself is a crime. An accomplice or accessory, the prosecution submitted, is treated as a principal offender deserving stringent punishment.
The prosecutor informed the court that 31 cases were registered in Rawalpindi in connection with the November 26 protest and 1,151 individuals were arrested, including 64 Afghan nationals. Citing a report by the Ministry of Finance, he said the three-day protest cost the government Rs500 million directly and resulted in an economic loss of Rs190 billion. During the protest, 170 attacks were allegedly carried out on police in Islamabad and Rawalpindi—actions the prosecution said clearly fell within the definition of terrorism. It added that four vehicles, 13 crime empties, police weapons and equipment, nailed sticks, and slingshots were recovered from the attackers, and that direct firing was carried out at police in Faizabad.
During his arguments, the prosecutor also referred to Quaid-i-Azam’s March 5, 1913 speech, stating that the founder had said that crimes and anarchy could not lead to good governance. He further argued that experts believe most political offenders view themselves as saviours rather than criminals, and that religious or ideological motivations often underpin such acts. Violent protests, he said, are used as a tactic to pressure the state into arbitrary decisions, and seeking power through violence constitutes a political crime.
The court agreed with the prosecution’s stance and dismissed the petition. Earlier, after the arguments concluded, the court had reserved its decision and directed Aleema Khanum not to leave until the verdict was announced. It later delivered the reserved verdict, dismissing the petition.
