00:00 So, Mr. Sultan, this case is a piece of newspaper adornment.
00:03 Columns and editorials are being written.
00:05 Now, the government will find out the details of this case
00:09 in the coming days.
00:14 Where, when and how did they give the statement?
00:16 There is a magistrate's name.
00:17 We will find out that in the coming days.
00:20 First of all, tell us, in the eyes of the law,
00:23 what is the status of that statement?
00:26 And how effectively can the government use it in legal terms?
00:31 Sir, this statement of 164, which is taken under CRPC,
00:36 to see the value of this statement,
00:38 the most important thing is the Supreme Court's judgment of 2008,
00:41 which says that until an FIR exists,
00:44 the need for this statement or its value is minimal.
00:49 If there is no cross-examination of any statement,
00:53 if there is no cross-examination,
00:56 then it has no legal value and cannot be used against anyone.
00:59 Then, the judgment you mentioned in the beginning of the Supreme Court,
01:02 the confines of 164 are defined in that.
01:05 Now, in this particular case,
01:07 some facts and circumstances are also very different.
01:09 A person against whom there is a matter of abduction
01:13 and there is a FIR of abduction,
01:15 if that person is suddenly given a statement in court,
01:18 then how much value will that statement have in itself,
01:20 you understand that better than me.
01:22 In the previous court, the case of Mr. Esaq Dar was also discussed like this.
01:26 What was his fate, is also in front of you.
01:29 The statements of 164,
01:31 unless they are added to the FIR in the case of eloping and getting married,
01:34 apart from that, I have never seen them succeed in their lawsuit
01:38 because most of the times, they are obtained under duress and coercion.
01:42 That aspect is also not clear here.
01:44 Was there any pressure on them because there was no duress?
01:47 Then, the most important thing is that the atmosphere in which this statement is taken,
01:51 that atmosphere is very important.
01:52 The nature of the questions here,
01:54 the judge asks you 5-6 questions,
01:56 that are you giving it with your free will?
01:58 Then that question is of exact and proper nature.
02:00 The statement that has come in the public eye,
02:03 first of all, the status of that statement is not clear
02:05 because the statement of 164 cannot be brought in the public eye.
02:07 Despite that, the kind of broken statement that was brought,
02:10 I don't think, in my 21-year law,
02:15 that on the basis of this statement, this case will succeed against Mr. Khan
02:18 or against anyone for that matter.
02:21 Then, there is a very important thing in this
02:23 that this investigation should not have been done by the FIA
02:26 when Qasim Suri has sent it to the Chief Justice.
02:29 So, a Judicial Commission could have been made on this very easily
02:32 so that that aspect of equality, of equality of law and bias is not seen.
02:37 This is the statement of Mr. Rana Fadnavi.
02:39 Yes, you have given a very good advice.
02:42 It is a very good argument too.
02:44 Now, tell me that the current government in Pakistan
02:49 has the right to make a commission for free, fair and transparent investigation.
02:56 Under which Act is it present and what kind of commission can be made
03:00 on which all the parties,
03:04 the consensus will be accepted and whatever decision will be made, it will be accepted.
03:09 If you have seen, the Inquiries and Commission is an old law
03:12 and now the latest law is under the Inquiries and Commission Act
03:15 under which recently Qazi Faiz-e-Ishaq, Aamir Farooq and another third member
03:19 of Judge's Commission was made,
03:21 which commission was of course,
03:22 then the proceeding was made in the Supreme Court.
03:25 If the government could have made that commission so conveniently,
03:29 then I am very sure the government could have made a commission on this too
03:32 because there are a lot of repercussions of this case.
03:34 I am thinking as an independent person at the moment
03:37 that if Mr. Khan has done something in the matter of cipher
03:41 which is a violation of the Official Secrets Act,
03:44 This is a matter of national security.
03:45 So whoever it is, should be punished.
