ISLAMABAD: The Prime Minister’s Office has clarified a news item published in The News titled ‘PTI counsel grills PM in hearing of defamation plea against Imran’ on June 3, 2025, saying that facts were misrepresented and the story contained information which was contrary to proceedings of the court.
In a statement the PM office said: “The story misquotes Muhammad Hussain Chotia, the lawyer representing the defendant, Imran Khan as PTI’s counsel whereby he represented as the legal counsel of Mr Khan. The story also tries to establish in its headline that in the proceedings, prime minister was grilled whereby those who witnessed the proceeding in the court state the contrary. The prime minister was confident and answered all the queries put by the defendant’s counsel and supported his response with evidence. The prime minister also refuted the allegations levelled by the defendant’s counsel about the affidavit submitted by him and reiterated that the affidavit was submitted by fulfilling all the legal requirements.
“The defendant’s counsel kept his focus on wasting the precious time of the court by levelling baseless allegations regarding the fulfillment of the legalities regarding the document and kept beating around the bush rather than focusing on the case being heard and its legitimacy. Trying to avoid the facts of the case regarding which the defendant has been employing delaying tactics by taking adjournments and changing his lawyers many times, the defendant’s counsel took the same path and tried to keep the court busy in technicalities. The plaintiff, Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif had thorough clarity of the case and held his ground with confidence.
“The prime minister’s clarity about the case and fulfillment of all the legal formalities pertaining to submission of the affidavit by the prime minister took the defendant’s counsel by surprise who started to browse files in bewilderment and desperation. The prime minister asked the defendant’s counsel whether he is unable to find more questions or has run out them, at which the court echoed with laughter. “The story tried to create an impression that the prime minister was grilled, which is not only factually incorrect, but also the exact opposite happened in the proceeding rather the session ended with the defendant’s counsel making him a laughing stock,” the statement read.
