Supreme Court Grants Bail to Imran Khan in Eight May 9 Cases

ISLAMABAD – The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Wednesday approved bail for Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder and former Prime Minister Imran Khan in eight cases related to the May 9 riots.
The three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi and comprising Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi, granted the bail after hearing detailed arguments from both the prosecution and defense.
Earlier, Justice Hassan Azhar Rizvi replaced Justice Mian Gul Hassan Aurangzeb on the bench.
During the hearing, Chief Justice Afridi posed two key questions to both parties:
1. Can a final finding be given at the bail stage?
2. Considering past judgments where bail was granted in conspiracy-related cases, can the principle of consistency be applied here?
Special Prosecutor Zulfiqar Naqvi argued that any observations made during bail hearings are interim in nature and do not affect the outcome of the trial. He cited previous Supreme Court judgments, including the Ejaz Ahmed Chaudhry case, supporting the notion that bail-related findings are temporary and non-binding on trial courts.
Chief Justice Afridi emphasized that the court would not discuss the merits of the case, stating that the trial court alone is responsible for evaluating evidence. He urged the prosecution to differentiate this case from other conspiracy cases in which bail had been granted.
Naqvi contended that unlike past cases, this one included stronger digital evidence, such as WhatsApp messages, voice matching, photogrammetry tests, and testimonies from three witnesses. However, the Chief Justice reiterated that such evidence should be presented and assessed in trial court, not during a bail hearing.
Imran Khan’s lawyer, Salman Safdar, maintained that bail should be granted under the precedent set by earlier conspiracy-related cases. He also submitted records of relevant decisions.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court approved bail for Imran Khan in all eight cases connected to the May 9 incidents, reaffirming that the court remains cautious in making any findings at the bail stage, as such comments could prejudice the trial.
Chief Justice Afridi reminded both parties, “Let the trial court determine the facts. This court will not pass merit-based observations during bail proceedings.”