ISLAMABAD: Islamabad High Court on Thursday decided to indict PTI Chairman Imran Khan on September 22 in a contempt case over his remarks about the judge who approved Imran’s chief of staff Shahbaz Gill’s physical remand in a sedition case.

A five-member bench, comprising IHC Chief Justice (CJ) Athar Minal­lah, Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kay­ani, Justice Miangul Hassan Aur­an­gzeb, Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri and Justice Babar Sattar, took up the contempt case against the PTI chairperson.

“I want to give my stance; the court can question me,” Imran Khan said. To which the Chief Justice replied that the court had heard the arguments of all the lawyers.

Imran Khan appeared before the court along with his lawyer Hamid Khan while judicial assistants Munir A. Malik, Akhtar Hussain, Attorney General Ashtar Ausaf and Advocate General Islamabad were also present in the court.

During the hearing, the PTI chief’s counsel told the court that a supplementary reply was submitted in the court yesterday, adding the contempt of court proceedings against his client should be terminated.

The lawyer contended that the IHC referred to two verdicts of the Supreme Court, which were issued in the cases of Daniyal Aziz and Talal Chaudhry.

“Imran Khan’s case doesn’t fall under these two verdicts. The two cases were totally different from that of Imran Khan,” he maintained.

At this, CJ Minallah remarked that there are three types of contempt of court, described in the Firdous Ashiq Awan case which was a matter of scandalising the court.

“There is civil contempt of court, the second is judicial contempt and the third criminal contempt,” he said.

The judge asked if their reply was appropriate in light of the SC’s verdicts. No one can pressurise the court, observed the CJ.

Justice Minallah warned that threatening a district judge is a more serious offence than a Supreme Court judge.

High security was in place at the court which also elicited a rather sharp response from Imran Khan. “There is so much security it seems like (Indian spy) Kulbushan Yadav was being brought for hearing.”

He also responded to some questions thrown at him by journalists while he was entering the court. One journalist asked whether the government was preparing to arrest him. “They have been trying for a while,” he said.

Another remarked that whether security measures were put in place because he was considered dangerous. “I will become more dangerous when in prison.”

On Wednesday, in a supplementary response submitted at the high court, Imran Khan expressed “deep regret” over his “unintentional utterances” against Additional Sessions Justice Zeba Chaudhry.

However, the response stopped short of being an unconditional apology, with Imran Khan saying that he had ‘profound regard and respect for the honourable court and its subordinate courts and judges’.

It added that the “respondent (Imran) also assures this Honourable Court that he would not shy away from expressing his remorse to her”.

The court had sent back an earlier response, submitted by Imran’s legal team on August 31, terming it unsatisfactory.

The IHC had issued a show-cause notice to the former prime minister over his remarks at a rally in Islamabad’s F-9 park in which he threatened action against the judge and the Islamabad police officials responsible for Shahbaz Gill’s arrest.

The supplementary response added that due to his busy schedule, Imran was unaware that the matter of Gill’s remand was sub judice. It added that the widespread reporting regarding Gill’s torture led to the unintentional utterances against the judge.

It also cited statements made by former prime minister Nawaz Sharif against the then chief justice and the judges of the Supreme Court following his disqualification in the Panama Papers case.

The statement requested the withdrawal of the contempt case, while assuring the court that due care would be taken in giving statements about such matters in the future.