A district and sessions court in Islamabad has reserved its verdict on the sentence suspension request in the Iddat Nikkah marriage case involving Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founding chairman Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi.
The court announced that the verdict on the suspension of the sentence will be announced on June 27 at 3pm, while the main appeal hearing has been adjourned to July 2.
The sessions court's Judge Majoka was presiding over the hearing on Tuesday when he reaffirmed his commitment to a lawful decision, stating, "I will decide according to the law."
Representing the PTI founder and Bushra Bibi were Barrister Salman Safdar and Advocate Khalid Yousuf Chaudhry, while Zahid Asif Chaudhry appeared on behalf of Khawar Maneka, the complainant.
Today's hearing
At the outset of the hearing, Barrister Safdar began his argument, asserting, "I will argue for the suspension of the sentence within seven minutes, and the complainant should respond in less time."
He highlighted the excessive number of hearings - over 15 in three months - often delayed by the complainant and prosecution, suggesting a lack of substantial evidence.
Advocate Asif acknowledged Safdar's legal expertise.
The defendant's counsel detailed Bushra Bibi's situation, noting that numerous cases have been filed against the PTI founder and ex-PM, including the Cipher and Toshakhana cases, culminating in this Nikah case.
Safdar expressed sympathy for the complainant and described the extensive legal battles encountered.
He emphasised the importance of addressing both the main appeal and sentence suspension, referencing prior Islamabad High Court (IHC) rulings.
Justice Majoka inquired "Will you also be filing for suspension on medical grounds?"
Safdar affirmed, mentioning Bushra Bibi's health issues and the conditions of her confinement.
On June 9, Bushra Bibi filed a petition in the IHC seeking the suspension of her conviction and sentencing in the Iddat case.
Safdar highlighted the IHC's awareness of the proceedings and accused the complainant of using delay tactics.
He read the high court's directive, which mandates a verdict on the suspension of the sentence within 10 days and the main appeal within 30 days.
The complainant's consuel Advocate Zahid Asif questioned the need for sentence suspension if jail conditions were comfortable.
Safdar reiterated that he has been fighting criminal cases for years and highlighted the unique nature of this case.
Responding to Asif's objection, Safdar reiterated that he has been fighting criminal cases for years and highlighted the unique nature of this case.
He emphasised the case's complexity and Bushra Bibi's unique circumstances as a mother of five facing unprecedented charges.
"It’s a strange case where both husband and wife are in jail, so who committed fraud against whom?" he maintained.
The court reiterated its commitment to a legally sound decision, emphasising the need for convincing arguments on key issues, such as inheritance rights in the event of a husband's death during Iddat.
Lawyer Safdar pointed out that even if appeals are pending in district courts, the high court has the authority to suspend sentences.
Expressing hope, he said that he expected that Bushra Bibi would be released before Eid, adding that the same judge who heard the case should decide it.
Safdar argued that the case was filed six years after the alleged incident, without including the complainant's children as witnesses. He emphasized the irregularities in the trial court's decision, suggesting that the case lacked substantial evidence.
He concluded his arguments by stating, "The accusation is that the Nikah was conducted without completing the Iddat period.
If two husbands claimed or there was a case regarding children, it would be understandable. In this case, even the children are not complainants."
The court then took a 20-minute recess.
After the break, the complainant's lawyer, Zahid Asif Chaudhry, began arguments his arguments.
"The court needs to determine the validity of the sentence suspension. The appellant's counsel called Khawar Maneka a "liar", Chaudhry asserted.
He noted that the court did not play Maneka's full interview and highlighted his son Musa Maneka's interview denying false news about Bushra Bibi and the PTI founder's marriage.
Chaudhry stated that the term 'U-turn' was introduced by the PTI founder, adding, "On January 7, the PTI founder mentioned proposing to Bushra Bibi, pending her acceptance or refusal."
He sang a song from "Khuda Gawah" and cited Hadiths to argue the necessity of a guardian's consent for marriage.
He questioned the absence of Bushra Bibi's statement on Iddat and remarked, "Mufti Saeed was favourable when part of the core committee but turned unfavourable once he opposed them."
Chaudhry refuted claims that charges were framed in Bushra Bibi's absence, stating she was present but left before signing.
He also pointed out the absence of names for children who were to testify, stressing the seriousness of the sentence.
"When did your client learn about the marriage?" Judge Majoka queried.
"On January 2 during cross-examination," Chaudhry replied.
The judge questioned the delay in filing an application, to which Chaudhry responded, "An investigative body had detained him."
Majoka inquired about a previously withdrawn application filed before charges were framed and potential pressure or threats.
Chaudhry explained that respectable families avoid publicizing family matters and outlined the stages of legal proceedings.
Chaudhry concluded his arguments.
Judge Majoka asked Barrister Salman Safdar about his availability for the main appeal, who confirmed their readiness.
The Iddat case
On February 3, Imran and Bushra Bibi were sentenced in the Iddat Nikkah case. Twenty days later, the appeal against the verdict was filed in the sessions court. Judge Arjumand heard the appeal and was expected to announce his ruling on May 29, when he requested the IHC to send the case to another judge.
On June 14, the IHC ordered the additional sessions court of Islamabad to decide the appeals of PTI founder Imran Khan and his wife Bushra against their conviction in the Iddat Nikkah case in one month.
On June 11, the court questioned the validity of a judge's recusal from the case, suggesting that the reason for withdrawal might not be justified.
Later, the IHC transferred the case to ADSJ Muhammad Afzal Majuka. Imran and Bibi challenged the transfer of the appeal in the IHC through lawyer Salman Akram Raja. However, the registrar's office raised the objection that the appeal was pending before the session court.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ