ISLAMABAD: The case of controversial tweet against Advocate Iman Mazari and Hadi Ali Chatha has entered its final stage after the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge Thursday rejected their petitions seeking acquittal, re-examination of witnesses, and change of state counsel; and directed them to respond to Section 342 statements.
Additional District and Sessions Judge Muhammad Afzal Majuka heard the case. He enquired about the questionnaire under Section 342, to which Hadi Ali Chatha stated that he had not received its copy. The judge adjourned the hearing briefly, and directed typing and provision of the statement to the accused.
When the hearing resumed, Advocates Sher Afzal Marwat, President of the District Bar Naeem Gujjar, Islamabad Bar member Raja Aleem Abbasi and several other lawyers appeared on behalf of the accused.
The court’s orders from previous hearings were read out to Sher Afzal Marwat, after which he presented his arguments on a petition over reappointment of the state counsel.
Marwat argued that at least five years’ experience in criminal law is necessary for a state counsel, and he must have the confidence of the accused in order to represent them. Referring to various decisions of the Supreme Court, he also requested that the witnesses be summoned again so that cross-examination could be conducted.
President of the Bar Naeem Gujjar informed the court that Iman Mazari and Hadi Ali Chatha were pushed during the previous hearing, and the court’s atmosphere was stifling due to large presence of police. He requested the court to give full opportunity to the accused.
After the arguments concluded, the court dismissed all three petitions filed by Iman Mazari and Hadi Ali Chatha seeking acquittal, re-examination of witnesses, and change of state counsel. It also directed the accused to submit their section 342 statements at 2 p.m after a brief recess.
When the hearing resumed, the judge observed that if the accused submit their responses, the next date could be fixed for tomorrow. Marwat meanwhile, sought one day’s time to respond to section 342. The court has adjourned the case until Friday (today) for final arguments.
