ISLAMABAD: An additional district and sessions judge on Thursday dismissed the petitions of ex-PM Imran Khan and spouse Bushra Bibi seeking suspension of their jail term in the Iddat case.

ADSJ Mohammad Afzal Majoka, who issued the 10-page decision, observed that convicts were not entitled to bail “unless strong grounds are made to appear that conviction is not liable to be sustained”.

The two were convicted for contracting marriage during Iddat and awarded seven years in jail with a fine of Rs0.5m.

During the hearing, Mr Khan’s counsel Salman Akram Raja argued that Nikah was solemnised on Jan 1, 2018, and Khawar Fareed Maneka, the former husband of Bushra Bibi, lodged his complaint on Nov 25, 2023, adding that he did so after remaining in custody for about four months.

He cited judgements of the Supreme Court pronounced in 1992 that laid down Iddat period as 39 days.

PTI vows to move IHC against decision, says case ‘brought immense embarrassment to Pakistan’

Bushra Bibi’s counsel Salman Safdar argued that the charges were framed on Jan 16 this year and the verdict was announced on Feb 3, which shows that a “fair trial was not provided to the petitioners”.

He pointed out that superior courts had granted bail to women prisoners in identical cases.

Zahid Asif, counsel for Mr Maneka, argued that the court cannot suspend the sentence since the jail term was seven years.

Mr Asif also cited some judgements and Section 7 of the Muslim Family Law Ordinance that defines Iddat period as 90 days.

Judge Majoka stated that the Islamabad High Court had issued direction to conclude the trial within a fortnight, adding that in such a situation the sentence could not be suspended as the appeals had already been fixed for hearing.

The judge pointed out that “although no ground has been taken in petitions…that the petitioners convicted for the offence under Section 496 Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) which is bailable and the petitioners are entitled to bail as a matter of right”.

However, the judge was of the view that “grant of bail to a convict in bailable offences shall be an indefeasible and inalienable right like an under trial prisoner is entitled to” but “a person convicted of a bailable offence is entitled as of right to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of his appeal against his conviction”.

He went on to state: “It can be said that as convict cannot claim bail as a matter of right even in bailable offence under section 426 CrPC, therefore, on the same analogy it cannot be said that woman convict is entitled to bail under this section.”

Subsequently, the court concluded that “no ground for suspension of sentence is available to both the petitioners” and ruled that “both the petitions under section 426 CrPC are dismissed”.

‘Fake punishment’

Criticising the verdict, PTI Punjab Information Secretary Shaukat Basra said justice has been annihilated.

“There was no complication in the Iddat case instituted against party founder chairman Imran Khan and still a fake punishment has been handed down,” he said.

In a statement, Mr Basra said: “The Iddat case was instituted on political grounds and the founder chairman will soon be exonerated.”

Leader of Opposition in the National Assembly Omar Ayub said the party would challenge the order in the IHC, Dawn.com reported.

Speaking to the media, he reiterated that no dialogue would be held with the government until all PTI leaders and workers were released.

Meanwhile, the PTI termed the development “absolutely ridiculous”.

In a post on its official X account, the PTI said the Iddat case was “unprecedentedly despicable in both our country’s as well as Islamic history”, and had been “globally condemned and brought immense embarrassment to Pakistan”.

Mansoor Malik in Lahore also contributed to this report

Published in Dawn, June 28th, 2024