ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founding chairman Imran Khan’s wife Bushra Bibi’s counsel Barrister Salman Safdar in the Iddat case against Khan and his wife on Tuesday said that the date and time mentioned over the divorce certificate presented before the court has been tampered.
Bushra Bibi’s lawyer Safdar while arguing before additional district and sessions Judge Muhammad Afzal Majoka on the main appeals of Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi in the Iddat case said that the entire case is based on the divorce certificate and Nikkah nama (marriage contract).
The lawyer further said that Khawar Maneka, the complainant and former husband of Bushra Bibi stated his relationship with his ex-wife deteriorated but did not give in timeline. The witness alleged that Imran Khan was visiting Maneka’s house but did not mention any time and date, he said, adding that Maneka only told the court in his statement about the late hours calls of Khan to Bushra Bibi but he also did not mention any time.
He further said that it was also stated Farah Khan Gogi had given a mobile phone and SIM card to Bushra Bibi but the name Farah Khan was removed from the case.
Apart from Khawar Manika, there are five children in the whole family, but none of them appeared in the court. Awn Chaudhry is not Maneka’s son, he said, adding that was any medical expert called in this big case.
The lawyer further argued that the complainant's stance was not related to the completion of Iddat period but it was the right of reconciliation. He [the complainant] stated he divorced half-heartedly but here divorce was pronounced three times so divorce has taken place.
Safdar said that the first complaint in Iddat case was filed by Muhammad Hanif. Hanif said that fraud and forgery have been committed but his counsel RizwanAbbasi corrected him that fraud has not been committed with him. The lawyer and witnesses of both complainants [Muhammad Hanif and KhawarManeka] are the same, he said.
Bushra Bibi’s lawyer said that the court sentenced his client based on the second complaint filed by Maneka.
Maneka filed the complaint based on sections 496 and 496B of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), he said, adding that the allegations are proved false to the extent of 496B and now the court has to see to whom fraud and forgery has been committed. He said that fraud has been mentioned in this case but there is no mention of Iddat period and reconciliation.
The judge told the lawyer that if you want give any judgment regarding it so that I could read it. Safdar produced different judgments before the court. He further told the court that tomorrow he will argue for one hour on an important portion. The court adjourned the hearing of the case till Wednesday (today).
Copyright Business Recorder, 2024
Comments
Comments are closed.