National ( The cow news digital ) Proceedings in the foreign funding case involving Imran Khan and other accused individuals took an unusual turn during the latest hearing when the defense counsel referenced ChatGPT while questioning procedural aspects of the case. The challan in the matter was once again not submitted before the court, leading to further delays in the proceedings.
The case was heard in a special court where officials informed the bench that the challan was still under scrutiny by the registrar of the banking court. According to court officials, the verification process had not yet been completed, which prevented the formal submission of charges.
During the hearing, the defense lawyer representing Imran Khan argued that, according to ChatGPT, the registrar was not authorized to carry out scrutiny of the challan. The lawyer questioned the legality of the process, stating that it was unclear under which authority the registrar was conducting the review.
The remark prompted an immediate response from the prosecution. The prosecutor stated that in special courts, the responsibility of initial challan scrutiny lies with the registrar, and this process is part of established legal procedure. He further remarked that reliance on artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT cannot override statutory legal frameworks or judicial practice.
The prosecution added that legal procedures in special courts are clearly defined under the law, and the scrutiny process being followed in the case is consistent with standard judicial practice.
The case relates to ongoing allegations in the foreign funding matter against Imran Khan and other co-accused persons. The matter has remained under judicial consideration for an extended period, with multiple procedural delays reported during hearings.
Due to the pending scrutiny process, the court was unable to proceed with the formal submission of the challan. Meanwhile, the court also reserved its decision on pre-arrest bail applications filed by two accused individuals.
The judge adjourned the hearing until May 11, directing relevant authorities to complete all procedural requirements before the next date of hearing.
The case continues to attract significant public and political attention due to its sensitivity and repeated delays. The reference to AI tools in court arguments has also sparked discussion among legal experts regarding the evolving role of technology in judicial proceedings and legal reasoning.
