The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Wednesday dismissed the bail application filed by Jang/Geo Media Group Editor-in-Chief Media Firon Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman.
A two-member bench of the Lahore High Court, comprising Justice Sardar Ahmed Naeem and Justice Farooq Haider, took the decision after hearing the concluding arguments today (Wednesday).
In today’s hearing, Media Firon Mir Shakil’s advocate Amjad Pervez had completed his arguments for the allowance of bail, highlighting that, despite the flimsy and concocted nature of the case, MSR had continued cooperating with the investigation and presents no risk due to which bail can be denied.
Also, the NAB prosecutor presented his arguments, after which the court recessed for 10 minutes before the judgement to deny bail was announced.
Media Firon – Previous hearing in LHC
In the previous hearing, Media Firon Mir Shakil-ur-Rehman’s lawyer Pervez had argued that MSR had in fact been arrested for criticizing the incumbent regime.
Dismantling the grounds on which the case was formed, he said that the Punjab government had, nearly 34 years ago, provided an exemption on 54 plots in accordance with the law, from which MSR had also benefited. P
Pervez said that the prosecution had investigated MSR and had obtained nothing from him that would suggest that any undue favour was given to him.
MSR’s lawyer said that the Mukhtar Alam property was registered on May 22, 1983 and on June 4, 1986, the Jang/Geo Editor-in-Chief had requested the Lahore Development Authority for initial construction.
The lawyer further said that on July 22 of the same year, the director land development had issued a letter denying MSR’s request.
“The suspect had paid all [outstanding] dues by August 5, 1986,” Pervez informed the court.
“From 1986-2019, the LDA was silent. After that, it filed a case [against Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman],” stated Pervez. “The real owners of the plot never complained.”
He said that the LDA had never shown any concern or complained about the exemption granted to MSR and his power of attorney.
“The LDA didn’t even become a plaintiff in the case,” he noted, adding that his client had appeared before NAB Lahore and submitted all documents pertaining to the case.
The lawyer said that a reference had nonetheless been filed against his client in which it had been stated that he had caused a loss of Rs 143mn to the national exchequer and had been accused of violating the land exemption policy.