Pakistan's former Prime Minister Imran Khan arrives to appear before the High Court in Islamabad on September 22, 2022. Image Credit: AFP

ISLAMABAD: A judicial magistrate of Islamabad on Saturday issued an arrest warrant for Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI)’s Chairman Imran Khan over his continuous disappearance in a case pertaining to his threatening remarks about a female judge and police high-ups.

The court of Judicial Magistrate Rana Mujahid Raheem had repeatedly summoned Imran Khan in the case but he failed to appear. At this, an arrest warrant had been issued against him. The court had ordered the Station House Officer (SHO) Margalla Police Station to present the accused Imran Khan Niazi, son of Ikramullah Niazi before the court after arresting him.

It may be mentioned here that the capital police had registered FIR No.407 on August 20, against Imran Khan under sections 504/506 and 188/189 for threatening female judge Zeba Chaudhry and officials of Islamabad Police.

However, the clauses of Anti Terrorism Act (ATA) were removed from the FIR on the directives of Islamabad High Court (IHC). The case was shifted to the district court from the Anti Terrorism Court (ATC) after the decision of IHC.

Following the issuance of the warrant, PTI leader Asad Umar warned the government to not arrest Imran Khan, saying that they will “regret” the decision.

Meanwhile, former information minister Fawad Chaudhry said that the issuance of a warrant in such a “weak” case was pointless.

Earlier on Saturday, Khan, for the third time, avoided tendering an unconditional apology in a contempt case as he submitted his response to the IHC.

In the last hearing on September 22, Khan apologised before the IHC and assured the court that he would not issue such a statement again — leading the court to delay his indictment.

The PTI chairman appeared on Friday before the court of judge Chaudhry and told the court staff that he wanted to apologise to the judge, however, she was on leave.

But in the latest response, Khan, although mentioning that he “might have crossed the red line while making a public speech”, fell short of apologising for his remarks.

“The deponent (Khan) never intended to threaten the judge [...] and that there was no intention behind the statement to take any action other than legal action,” his response affidavit stated.

Khan said that he assures the court that he is willing to explain and clarify before the female judge that neither he nor his party sought any action against her, reports said.