In the murder case of Sana Yousaf, IHC confirms witness statements.

A petition contesting the Sana Yousaf murder case’s witness statements being recorded without the accused and his attorney present was denied by the Islamabad High Court.

The accused Umar Hayat’s motion to overturn the trial court’s actions was denied by the court.

In a lengthy ruling spanning nine pages, Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro declared that the trial court proceedings contained no legal flaws, irregularities, or jurisdictional errors.

Because the accused was present via video link—which is legally regarded as valid attendance—the court’s order papers are accurate and legitimate.

In order to guarantee swift trials, the trial court is legally required to hold hearings every day, as the verdict further made clear.

The public interest as a whole requires the right to a quick trial under Article 10-A.

Attorneys must be present in court for the sake of the case’s advancement, not for their own convenience.

The court stated that it is not appropriate to make accusations against judges based just on suspicion.

It mandated that the accused be given legal representation at state cost in the event of additional delays and told attorneys to abstain from future unsubstantiated allegations against the trial court.

The petitioner had asked that witness testimony be thrown out and re-recorded since they were made without the accused or his attorney present.