Muzaffarabad (POJK): An anti-terrorism court in Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (POJK) has rejected the bail plea of kidnapped Ahmed Farhad Shah. As per Dawn report, the court, while dismissing the plea, remarked that the legal points raised by his lawyer are not applicable to the present case.
Surprisingly, Shah, who was abducted from his Islamabad residence on May 15 and missing since then, was found in the custody of Gujjar Kohala police, a village near the PoJK border with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, on May 29. .
Around the same time, the ongoing case for his safe return was being heard in the Islamabad High Court (IHC). At that time, the court hearing had taken a serious turn when the IHC summoned the Defense and Intelligence Secretaries related to that case to the court. IHC judge Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, who was hearing Shah's case, had prepared 12 questions, most of which related to the functions and responsibilities of spy agencies.
Initially, the May 13 FIR of the Sadar police station was kept 'secret' by the police, but it later emerged that it was against 150-200 unidentified "miscreants" for "inciting violence, blocking roads and paramilitary Rangers". It was meant to incite violence., This was recorded for "attack on convoy". According to Dawn report, violence broke out at various places during the march from Bararkot to Muzaffarabad on May 13 on the orders of the Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC).
Responding to these claims, Karam Dad Khan in his plea said that Shah was not even a named accused in the FIR and he was implicated in the case with ulterior motives.
Additionally, the council also raised questions as to how Shah carried out these actions when he was present in Islamabad, while no internet services were allowed in PoJK during the protests. During the case, it was argued that Shah was added to the FIR when he was present in Islamabad.According to Dawn report, he was traced through social media during the investigation.
Shah had shared "factually incorrect, provocative and hateful content" on his Facebook account in the days before the protests.
Earlier on May 13, he had incited hatred against law-enforcement institutions, following which, among other things, two more sections were added to the FIR. The opposition council also supported granting bail because the prosecutor wanted to recover his phone.
Conclusively, Special Judge Mahmood Farooq said, "A perusal of the content advertised shows that the content was not only hateful and inflammatory, but also exaggerated the loss of life and property during the protests, thereby misleading the public and Laws troubled- Excitement and hatred have increased among the enforcement agencies."And prima facie, the petitioner/accused appears to be linked to the offenses initially registered in the FIR and added later."
Surprisingly, Shah, who was abducted from his Islamabad residence on May 15 and missing since then, was found in the custody of Gujjar Kohala police, a village near the PoJK border with Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, on May 29. .
Around the same time, the ongoing case for his safe return was being heard in the Islamabad High Court (IHC). At that time, the court hearing had taken a serious turn when the IHC summoned the Defense and Intelligence Secretaries related to that case to the court. IHC judge Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, who was hearing Shah's case, had prepared 12 questions, most of which related to the functions and responsibilities of spy agencies.
Initially, the May 13 FIR of the Sadar police station was kept 'secret' by the police, but it later emerged that it was against 150-200 unidentified "miscreants" for "inciting violence, blocking roads and paramilitary Rangers". It was meant to incite violence., This was recorded for "attack on convoy". According to Dawn report, violence broke out at various places during the march from Bararkot to Muzaffarabad on May 13 on the orders of the Joint Awami Action Committee (JAAC).
Responding to these claims, Karam Dad Khan in his plea said that Shah was not even a named accused in the FIR and he was implicated in the case with ulterior motives.
Additionally, the council also raised questions as to how Shah carried out these actions when he was present in Islamabad, while no internet services were allowed in PoJK during the protests. During the case, it was argued that Shah was added to the FIR when he was present in Islamabad.According to Dawn report, he was traced through social media during the investigation.
Shah had shared "factually incorrect, provocative and hateful content" on his Facebook account in the days before the protests.
Earlier on May 13, he had incited hatred against law-enforcement institutions, following which, among other things, two more sections were added to the FIR. The opposition council also supported granting bail because the prosecutor wanted to recover his phone.
Conclusively, Special Judge Mahmood Farooq said, "A perusal of the content advertised shows that the content was not only hateful and inflammatory, but also exaggerated the loss of life and property during the protests, thereby misleading the public and Laws troubled- Excitement and hatred have increased among the enforcement agencies."And prima facie, the petitioner/accused appears to be linked to the offenses initially registered in the FIR and added later."
