ATC allows trial of 16 Jinnah House ‘vandals’ in military court

LAHORE: An Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) on Thursday allowed the handing over of 16 suspects, involved in the ransacking and vandalising of Jinnah House, to the commanding officer so they can be tried under the army laws, as the authorities tighten the noose on the perpetrators of May 9 mayhem, Geo News reported.

Enraged by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Chairman Imran Khan’s arrest, party supporters pillaged government and military installations on May 9.To contain the violence, the government called in the army and announced to try the protesters under army laws. A large number of PTI workers and leaders were arrested in a countrywide crackdown.

In the order, ATC Judge Abher Gul Khan accepted the request of the army officer who had sought the custody of the vandals presently confined in Camp Jail, Lahore.They were named in two separate cases filed in connection with the attack on Corps Commander House also known as Jinnah House.

The accused are Amar Zohaib, Ali Iftikhar, Ali Raza, Muhammad Arsalan, Muhammad Umair, Muhammad Raheem, Zia-ur-Rehman, Waqas Ali, Raees Ahmad, Faisal Irshad, Muhammad Bilal Hussain, Faheem Haider, Arzam Junaid, Mian Muhammad Akram Usman, Muhammad Hashir Khan, and Hassan Shakir.

“In view of the request made by Irfan Athar, Commanding Officer/Military Officer, duly forwarded by the prosecution as the case of above mentioned accused is exclusively triable by a military court, therefore, while accepting the request of Commanding Officer u/s 549(3) Cr.P.C, read with Rule 7(f) of Criminal Procedure (Military Offenders) Rules 1970, Superintendent, Camp Jail, Lahore is directed to hand over the custody of above said accused to Commanding Officer for further proceedings in accordance with the law,” the order read.

“They are found guilty of offences under sections 3, 7 and 9 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 read with Section 2(1)(d) and 59(4) of Pakistan Army Act, 1952, exclusively triable by Military Court, to the acceptance of which learned DPG did not raise any objection and forwarded the request for appropriate orders.”