Ticker

12/recent/ticker-posts

Header Ads Widget

FIR registered against six in judge Arshad Malik controversial video case

ISLAMABAD: A case has been registered against six suspects for involvement in controversial video of judge Arshad Malik, who was removed from post after the video from Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz showed him allegedly admitting to lack of evidence against Nawaz Sharif.
In the petition by Malik, he stated that PML-N leaders Maryam Nawaz and Shehbaz Sharif should face action for displaying the controversial video.
The judge said that the two PML-N leaders should face action for the tempered video, casting aspersion on the state institutions.
Malik said that he was appointed a district and sessions judge between 2000 to 2003, alleging suspect Mian Tariq drugged him through a meal and made his secret video.
Judge Malik claimed his video was manipulated and edited into controversial content. He said that the video was later sold to PML-N’s Mian Raza.
He said that Nasir Butt, Nasir Janjua, Khurram Yusuf, Mehar Ghulam Jillani started to put pressure on him to aid Nawaz Sharif in the cases against him.
Meanwhile, PML-N Spokesperson Marriyum Aurangzeb said that the FIR in the video case is a tactic by the government and PML-N is not linked to the arrest of Mian Tariq.
She said that if the judge was removed due to misconduct then Nawaz Sharif should be released from the prison as well.
A day earlier, the Federal Investigation Agency arrested suspect Mian Tariq who made the video Accountability Court judge Arshad Malik’s.
Sources said that the video was traced from Mian Tariq’s house and forensics of the controversial video was already carried out.
On July 12, judge Arshad Malik was relieved from his duties by the federal government due to the allegations.
Nawaz was sentenced to seven years in prison by the same judge in the Al-Azizia Steel Mills reference in December. PML-N VP Maryam Nawaz alleged that the video showed the judge saying he was "blackmailed" and coerced into sending her father to prison despite there being no proof of corruption against him.

Post a Comment

0 Comments