Court defers hearing in May 9 Radio Pakistan attack case

PESHAWAR, (UrduPoint / Pakistan Point News - 17th Mar, 2026) The Anti-Terrorism Court here on Tuesday heard proceedings in the May 9 attack case on Radio Pakistan, where key legal arguments were presented regarding the powers of the prosecution and submission of the challan, before the court adjourned further hearing till the next date.

During the hearing, counsel for Radio Pakistan, Shabbir Hussain Gigyani, appeared before the court, while Special Prosecutor Nauman-ul-Haq Kakakhel submitted his report. The counsel argued that the role of a special prosecutor is limited to trial proceedings and does not extend to interfering in investigative matters.

He contended that although the accused have been nominated in the challan, the special prosecutor has not submitted it, adding that a contempt of court petition has already been filed in this regard.

Responding to the arguments, the special prosecutor informed the court that he had never been directed by the court to submit the challan and said no impression should be created that any such challan had been issued. He maintained that his report had been submitted and any aggrieved party could present arguments at the next hearing.

The counsel for Radio Pakistan further argued that the special prosecutor was appointed to ensure trial proceedings and not to benefit the accused, and therefore must fulfill all legal requirements.

During the proceedings, the court summoned the Deputy Public Prosecutor and remarked that the District Public Prosecutor should also be called to present a complete stance before further action.

Later, District Public Prosecutor Sifatullah appeared before the court and stated that although he had received notice, his role ceased after the government appointed a special prosecutor in the case.

The special prosecutor further informed the court that under Section 18 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, the government has the authority to appoint a special prosecutor in any case. He also argued that the contempt of court petition was not maintainable before this court.

The court observed that if any party had objections, they should file a proper application. Subsequently, the court adjourned hearing on the contempt petition and postponed further proceedings in the case till the next date.