ISLAMABAD
An Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) on Saturday, held a hearing in the narcotics and terrorism case against senior journalist Matiullah Jan. Due to the unavailability of Matiullah Jan’s primary counsel, Barrister Mian Ali Ashfaq, he was represented by Barrister Raja Abdul Qadeer. The proceedings were adjourned for another hearing at a later date.
Barrister Qadeer filed an application in court under Section 265 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). A copy of the application was also provided to the prosecution for their reference and arguments.
The court directed that the matter be discussed in detail at the next hearing. Barrister Raja Abdul Qadeer informed the court that the arguments on the application would then be presented by Barrister Mian Ali Ashfaq. Following this, the court adjourned the hearing for detailed arguments to the following week.
Speaking to the media after the hearing, Barrister Raja Abdul Qadeer elaborated on the purpose of the 265 CrPC application. He said that during the previous hearing, a request had been made for the complete case record related to Matiullah Jan.
“When the challan was submitted earlier, the full record was not presented before the court. We filed the 265 CrPC application requesting the complete case record from the prosecution,” he explained.
He added that during the last hearing, it was highlighted that a mandatory requirement under the Supreme Court judgment required the video recording of any such incidents involving the accused.
“The prosecution admitted that no such video recording exists in this case,” he said.
Barrister Raja Abdul Qadeer further explained that the application clearly stated that the court can proceed with framing charges only if the trial material is present.
“In the absence of trial material, which is entirely missing in this case, the court cannot proceed,” he said. He added that the prosecution was officially notified about the application, which was accepted, and the next hearing for detailed proceedings was scheduled for November 25.
At the next hearing, he said, the court will examine all the records related to the case to determine whether the trial material exists and whether charges can be framed.
“The provision of Section 265 CrPC is intended to ensure that if there is no trial material at the outset, the court, the accused, and the prosecution do not waste time. This provision allows the case to be dismissed early and the accused to be honorably discharged if warranted,” he said.
Barrister Raja Abdul Qadeer also mentioned related applications under Section 22 CrPC and for CD-R data collection. He explained that a petition had been filed in the District and Sessions Court to direct the investigating officer to collect mobile phone-related data from the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA).
“Since this incident is over a year old and Matiullah Jan was present elsewhere with his colleague, Saqib Basheer, at the time, PTA has been directed to preserve this data legally and ensure it is included in the record to properly establish the chain of evidence,” he said.
He emphasized that the investigation must be conducted honestly according to police and legal rules. “If the investigation is carried out properly, then the foundation of this case may not exist at all,” he added.
Later Matiullah Jan also spoke to the media, linking the hearing to broader concerns regarding harassment of journalists. He referred to a suo motu notice taken by the Supreme Court in 2020 regarding his abduction and torture. “There has been no progress on that matter in the Supreme Court, and we expect that cases involving harassment of other journalists, including my own abduction case, will also be taken up immediately,” he said.
He highlighted that following the 27th constitutional amendment, an appellate constitutional court has been established, and pending matters have now been transferred to it. “I believe the constitutional court must address cases concerning journalists, as these cases test the court’s ability to protect fundamental human rights. The court’s intervention in such matters will show that it safeguards the rights of the society’s eyes and ears, the journalists,” he added, referring to the case of the late journalist Arshad Sharif, which has also been taken up by the courts multiple times.
The next hearing will see detailed arguments from both the prosecution and the defense on all pending applications, after which the court will determine the further course of action in the case.