LA HOR E: The Lahore High Court on Tuesday adjourned the proceedings on the post-arrest bail petitions of incarcerated PTI founding chairman Imran Khan in eight cases of May 9 riots.

During the hearing, Imran Khan`s sister Aleema Khan and Punjab Assembly opposition leader Ahmad Khan Bhachar were also presentin the court.

Justice Syed Shahbaz Ali Rizvi, who headed a two-member bench, posed a query whether different people were involved in the May 9 riots in Lahore and Rawalpindi.

The judge also asl(ed for a list of the suspects released on bail in similar cases.

He directed the petitioner`s counsel, Barrister Salman Safdar, to obtain the relevant records and assist the court accordingly.

The judge remarked that the bench did not want to rush into a judgment.

A prosecutor informed the bench that the police suffered losses amounting to Rs40 million during the May 9 attacks, while the damage to the Jinnah House alone exceeded Rs520m.

He said PTI founder Imran Khan ignored the trial court`s directions and refused to undergo polygraph and photo-grammetric tests.

The prosecutor asked the court to dismiss the bail petitions for defying the trial court`s orders.

To a court query, the prosecutor said Senator Ejaz Chaudhry had been granted bail because his role was different from other accused persons.

He argued that those who abetted the crime were equally liable to punishment.

He said that since being ousted from power, the PTI founding chairman had been inciting the public against state institutions.

The bench adjourned the hearing till June 19.

An anti-terrorism court had on Nov 27, 2024, denied bail to the former prime minister in these eight cases.

The bail petitions mainly argue that the prosecution failed to establish the petitioner`s association with the unfortunate occurrences narrated in the FIRs.

They say the petitioner has been implicated in the May 9 cases as a result of a wellorchestrated plan, merely to harass and humiliate him for politicalreasons even though admittedly he was in the custody of the National Accountability Bureau.

The sole allegation against the petitioner in the cases is of `abetment`, which has been supplemented by the prosecution most vaguely, the pleas add.