Court summons Imran in 'un-Islamic' marriage case

A local court in Islamabad on Thursday summoned the former prime minister and PTI Chairman, Imran Khan, on September 25 in a case pertaining to his alleged ‘un-Islamic’ marriage with Bushra Bibi, Express News reported.

Civil Judge Qudratullah, in an order to the Superintendent Attock Jail, directed the latter to ensure that the PTI chairman is produced before the court. The former PM is languishing in Attock jail after being convicted in Toshakhana case.

His arrest was made on August 5, 2023 from his Zaman Park residence in Lahore.

During the hearing, the judge would also examine the arguments of Imran’s counsel challenging the court’s jurisdiction in hearing the said case and has directed him to prepare arguments after he sought time from the court.

Read More: Plea against Imran’s nikah thrown out

It should be noted that Imran Khan is facing charges of allegedly getting into wedlock with his third wife on the time of her Iddat, an Islamic terminology which is considered to be a specified time period of waiting for a woman before marrying to someone else after the death of her spouse or getting divorced.

It may be recalled that the former prime minister in July challenged a trial court’s decision to accept a petition seeking criminal proceedings against him and his wife, Bushra Bibi, for cohabiting after their first nikah that allegedly took place without completion of the latter’s mandatory iddat period.

Qudratullah, a judicial magistrate in Islamabad, issued a nine-page detailed judgment on July 18 stating that the petition filed against the former premier with regards to his ‘illegal’ marriage was admissible. The judge also ordered Imran and his wife to appear in his court.

Read More: Imran, Bushra Bibi's Nikkah based on ‘fraud’: Aun Chaudhry

Earlier, on July 14, Islamabad Additional District and Sessions Judge Muhammad Azam Khan remanded the case to the judicial magistrate. He had also dismissed another civil court’s verdict declaring the plea challenging the legality of the marriage inadmissible.

Imran in his petition contended that the allegations contained in the private complaint do not constitute an offense within the ambit of Section 496 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC). “Thus continuation of the trial would amount to the abuse of the process of law,” it added.

It said the most significant question of the offence falling within the mischief of Section 496 PPC was neither examined by the trial court nor by the revisional court.

“Moreover, the revisional court went a step ahead by holding that the issuance of notice to the respondent in criminal revision is not required. This part of the order vitiates the entire proceedings as no criminal revision can be decided without hearing the second party,” it added.