An anti-terrorism court (ATC) on Saturday directed human rights lawyer Imaan Zainab Hazir-Mazari and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, to record their statements under Section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) at the next hearing in the security breach case.
ATC Judge Tahir Abbas Sipra conducted the proceedings at Adiala Jail and adjourned the hearing until October 26 after both accused declined to record their statements.
Imaan and Hadi are facing a jail trial in a 2024 case concerning the alleged disruption of an international cricket team’s security route and incitement to public unrest. The couple has been accused of removing barriers along the route and was indicted on October 7.
During Saturday’s proceedings, Hadi requested the court to allow the state counsel to record the statement on their behalf.
“Let the state counsel record the statement under Section 342 on our behalf,” he told the court.
Judge Sipra, however, said that recording statements under Section 342 was a matter between the court and the accused, adding that they would have to respond themselves.
Sindh Forms JIT to Investigate Mir Raza Ali’s Murder, Seeks Intelligence Agency Nominees
“We will not record the statement under Section 342,” Imaan said.
The judge warned that if the accused refused to comply, the court would note in its order that no response had been submitted. He directed both accused to record their statements at the next hearing, scheduled for Monday, October 26.
State Counsel Cross-Examines Prosecution Witnesses
At the previous hearing, a state-appointed counsel cross-examined all prosecution witnesses.
The court had appointed Atif Mehmood as state counsel to cross-examine the witnesses, replacing Taimoor Janjua, who was removed from the case over his past conduct.
The appointment of a state attorney followed the defence counsel’s failure to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses.
Defence Seeks Delay in Final Verdict
On Saturday, the defence filed an application requesting the trial court to refrain from delivering its final judgment until the Islamabad High Court (IHC) decides a petition seeking the transfer of the case to another court.
The application stated that the transfer petition was already pending before the IHC and requested that this development be incorporated into the trial court’s judicial record.
The defence also pointed out that the appointment of the state counsel had been challenged before the high court.
It urged the trial court to defer its final decision until the IHC rules on the transfer petition.
The case is scheduled to resume on October 26, when the court has directed Imaan Mazari and Hadi Chattha to record their statements under Section 342 of the CrPC.
