A special accountability court in Islamabad has completed the trial in the £190 million reference case, involving the founder of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Imran Khan and his wife, Bushra Bibi, and has reserved its verdict.
The hearing, held at Adiala Jail on Wednesday, was presided over by Judge Nasir Javed Rana. After the defence counsel finished presenting their arguments, the judge decided to reserve the judgment.
The final session of the trial lasted for approximately eight hours and 15 minutes. Both PTI founder Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi were present in court during the proceedings.
The court is scheduled to announce its decision on December 23. On Tuesday, the prosecutor for the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) concluded the presentation of his arguments in the case.
The final arguments in the £190 million reference case against Imran Khan, founder of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), and his wife Bushra Bibi were presented in an accountability court, with both sides accusing each other of political motives and misrepresentation.
Defence counsel Salman Safdar, representing Khan, described the case as politically motivated. “This is a reference of political revenge,” he stated, adding that Imran Khan and his wife had been proven innocent in all previous cases.
He further argued that the funds in question were intended for Hassan Nawaz, not Imran Khan, and that the reference was created to target a specific couple.
Safdar emphasised that Imran Khan, even before becoming prime minister, was known for his work as a social worker, collecting billions of rupees in donations.
He claimed that the reference focused on a 50% conflict of interest but argued that the investigation had excluded key details, including the fact that no personal gain or state loss occurred, and that the funds had been brought into Pakistan. He also dismissed accusations that Bushra Bibi had played any public role, noting that she was not a public office-holder.
“The trust is operating as it should. No money has been misappropriated,” Safdar insisted. He further highlighted that no land had been transferred in Bushra Bibi’s name, and that no settlement agreement existed with the National Crime Agency (NCA). He concluded that the reference should be dismissed, not leading to any conviction.
In response, NAB’s lawyer, Amjad Pervaiz, rejected the defence's claims, stating that the bureau had not altered its stance. “The reference remains unchanged, and no allegations regarding personal financial gain are being made,” he clarified.
Pervaiz argued that the issue revolved around Khan’s approval of illegal settlement arrangements while serving as Prime Minister.
He pointed out that two cabinet members had been presented as witnesses, and the accused had the opportunity to bring others in their defence. Pervaiz also emphasised that Bushra Bibi, as the Prime Minister’s spouse, had used her influence improperly.
Addressing the connection to Farah Gogi, Pervaiz noted that the accused had not denied their relationship with her. He pointed out that receipts from the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) related to land payments were cashed by the accused, and that Farah Bibi had not inherited property worth 530 million rupees.
The case centres on the alleged illegal approval of settlement funds by Khan, with the court expected to announce its decision on December 23.
What is the £190 million case?
The case alleges that Imran Khan and others involved adjusted Rs50 billion—equivalent to £190 million at the time—that was transferred by the UK's National Crime Agency (NCA) to the Pakistani government. This sum was part of a settlement with a property tycoon.
As Prime Minister, Khan obtained cabinet approval for this settlement on December 3, 2019, without disclosing the confidential details of the agreement. The arrangement stipulated that the funds would be submitted to the Supreme Court on behalf of the tycoon.
According to NAB officials, Khan and his wife received land worth billions of rupees from the property tycoon, intended for the construction of an educational institute.
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