ISLAMABAD: PTIleaders Imran Khan and Shah Mehmood Qureshi received some semblance of relief on Friday, albeit short-lived, as the Supreme Court approved their postarrest bail in the cipher case, related to the alleged leak of state secrets.

The bail is subject to surety bonds worth Rs1 million each.

Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, authoring a three-page order, stated that there was no sufficient incriminating material available to show that Mr Khan communicated the information contained in the cipher, received from Washington, to the public `with the intention or calculation, directly or indirectly, in the interestorfor the benent of aforeign power`.

Besides, the disclosed information did not relate to any of the defence installations or affairs, nor did Mr Khan disclose any secret official code tothe public, Justice Shah wrote.

The observation came following a hearing by a three-judge bench led by acting Chief Justice Sardar Tariq Masood.

The state secrets charge is related to a classified cable sent to Islamabad by Pakistan`s ambassador in Washington last year, which Mr Khan is accused of making public. He deniesthe charge, saying the contents appeared in the media from other sources.

The petitioners, Mr Khan and Mr Qureshi, sought bail in the cipher case by challenging the Oct 27 and Nov 8 orders of the Islamabad High Court (IHC), which declined the bail for the offences punishable under Sections 5 and 9 of the Official Secrets Act, read with Section 345 of the Pakistan Penal Code.

Justice Athar Minallah, another member of the bench, wrote a five-page additional note along with Justice Shah`s main order.

`These petitions are converted into appeals and the same are allowed, Justice Shah wrote in the main order.

While Friday`s decision may benefit Mr Qureshi, former premier Imran Khan may not see the light of the day since he was under judicial remand in a £190 million settlement case and under arrest in the Toshakhana case. PTI`s spokesperson Shoaib Shaheen, however, welcomed the decision, describing the Supreme Court`s order as a big day for the party.

`No reasonable grounds` The court is of `the tentative opinion that there are no reasonable grounds for believing, at this stage, that the petitioners have committed the offence punishable under clause (b) of Section 5(3) of the Act but rather that there are sufficient grounds for further inquiry into their guilt of the said offence, which is to be finally decided by the learned trial court after the recording of the evidence of the parties`, Justice Shah said.

The discretion exercised by the IHC in declining bail to the petitioners was found to have been exercised perversely, that is, against the weight of the material available on the record of the case, which warranted interference by this Supreme Court, he said.

Meanwhile, in his additional note, Justice Minallah observed that the petitioners were alleged to be involved in an offence which did not fall under the category of offences that threaten society, such as rape, child abuse, homicide, etc.

`The investigation has been completed and trial is in progress. The trial is entirely dependent on documentary evidence. The incarceration of the petitioners will not serve any useful purpose,` the judge said.

`Moreover, their release on bail dur-ing the period of elections would ensure `genuine elections` and thus enable the people to exercise the right to express their will effectively and meaningfully.

There are no exceptional circumstances to decline the concession of bail,` he said.

`It is also [ECP`s] duty to ensure that there is no perception of oppression or repressive actions against one political party while others are treated favourably. The unflattering electoral history and oppressive treatment of political dissidents during the period of elections necessitates considering the grant of bail favourably as a rule,` he said.

The process of democratisation and democracy itself were gravely undermined from the very inception of Pakistan as an independent sovereign state, Justice Minallah regretted.

`It laid the foundations for repression against political opponents. Almost all the elected Prime Ministers remained incarcerated after being prematurely removed from office. Prime Ministers were disqualified and political opponents were persecuted for dissent and prevented from competing in elections by denying a level playing field,` he said.

The last general elections held in 2018 were an example of denying equal treatment to a particular political party.

One of the prime ministers was even sent to the gallows, and people were later restrained from attending his funeral. Half of the nation`s life has been spent under military dictators who did not face a day`s incarceration for abrogating the Constitution, toppling elected prime ministers and subjecting political workers to the worst form of oppression, Justice Minallah regretted.