Friday, June 25, 2021
Urdu Web Newspaper Live-TV(UK) Live-TV(PK)
Urdu Web Newspaper
Live-TV(UK) Live-TV(PK)

Meesha Shafi distrusts judge hearing defamation suit

Meesha Shafi distrusts judge hearing defamation suit
May 4, 2019
LAHORE (92 News) – Pakistani singer Meesha Shafi has distrusted the sessions judge hearing the defamation suit filed by singer and actor Ali Zafar. The court reserved the verdict on the application submitted by singer Meesha Shafi and adjoured the hearing till May 8.She also contended that her case be shifted to another court. On the other hand, the court cross-examined the one of the witnesses and summoned more witnesses on the next hearing. During the hearing, singer Ali Zafar’s counsel said that Meesha Shafi had levelled baseless allegations of harassment against him. He said that Ali Zafar’s reputation has been damaged by the false allegations of Meesha Shafi. Earlier Ali Zafar had said that a true man always comes to court without summons. “Meesha had targeted me for cheap popularity and personal interest,” he alleged. He hoped that he would get justice, saying that Meesha should come to court to face the case. Pakistani singer Meesha Shafi had challenged decision of Lahore High Court (LHC) in Supreme Court (SC) regarding defamation suit filed by singer and actor Ali Zafar. According to the details garnered, singer Meesha Shafi sought more time to cross-examine witnesses. In a petition, Meesha Shafi said that trial court had not allowed to defer questioning on the witnesses. It is pertinent to mention here that the LHC had set aside an earlier lower court directive that had mandated a conclusion to the defamation case by April 15 and instead gave the petitioners and respondents three months more. Meesha’s lawyer, Ahmed Pansota, had said, “Our stance, i.e. the difficulty involved in concluding the trial, including examination of over 40 witnesses till April 15, 2019, stands vindicated today as the Honorable Judge acknowledged the same while enlarging the time period, alongside providing us with the opportunity to approach the court again, if required.”