ISLAMABAD: A local court on Thursday reserved its verdict on Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founding chairman Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi’s appeals against the verdict of the trial court in “Iddat” against them.

District and sessions judge Shahrukh Arjumand, following the completion of arguments of the defence lawyer and Khan’s wife’s counsel Usman Gull’s rebuttal, reserved its verdict and fixed May 29 for its announcement.

Khan’s counsel Salman Akram Raja, Usman Gul, prosecutor Adnan Ali, and associate of complainant Khawar Maneka’s counsel Rizwan Abbasi appeared before the court.

At the start of the hearing, Abbasi’s associate told the court that the record of the case was with his lead counsel and he would argue before the court. The judge asked Abbasi’s associate, to inform his lead counsel to present his arguments via video link till 1:00 pm at any cost.

The court took a break till 1:00 pm.

After the break, Bushra Bibi started his rebuttal and told the court that first, he wanted to inform the court that the complaint had been filed very late. In the first phase, a stranger person Muhammad Hanif complained, and in the second phase the complaint was with the same subject by the ex-husband of his client. The court has to look at the evidence in both the complaints, he said.

The lawyer said that Maneka did not file the complaint for five years and 11 months. What was he doing during this period, he asked. He said that the case had been filed just for political victimisation.

Gull said the allegation against his client is that after the divorce, she solemnized her second Nikkah during the Iddat period. Prosecution depends upon documents but the documents produced before the court are photocopies, he said, adding that if a party failed to prove the documents before the court then how it can be considered authentic?

He said Mohammad Hanif, a stranger, was neither a witness nor related to the case. Khawar Maneka filed the complaint after the passage of around six years which proves his ill-intent, he said, adding that the complainant’s counsel failed to answer the question regarding delay in filing the complaint.

The counsel said that Maneka was released on November 24, 2024, and after 10 days he filed the complaint. The trial court used its judicial mind in a wrong way, he said, adding that the marriage is fraud or not but the criminal court has no jurisdiction to decide this case.

He further said that family courts decided about the alleged fraud marriage or Nikkah. The criminal court did not take any opinion from the family court, he said.

Bushra Bibi’s counsel said that if a complainant is failed to provide the document then it means that the document is not present. Why did the trial court give the decision when the documents were not submitted before the court, he asked.

He said that the complainant cannot make allegations just for the sake of arguments, it must be proved. His client in her 342 statement stated that her divorce took place in April 2017 and she solemnized Nikkah after completing her Iddat period, he said, adding that according to the judgment of Shariat court judge Zafer Ali Pasha marriage during Iddat period cannot be termed illegal.

After the completion of Usman Gull’s argument, the prosecutor Adnan Ali while arguing said that nowhere in the law is it written that such cases cannot be tried in a criminal court. He requested the court to uphold the sentence.

He said that the completion of Iddat is mandatory as the marriage depends on Iddat. The trial awarded the sentence to Khan and his wife for solemnizing Nikah during Iddat period, he said, adding that Maneka wanted to reconcile [Ruju] but Bushra Bibi solemnized Nikkah during Iddat.

Abbasi’s associate again and again requested the court to adjourn the hearing but the court turned down his request and told him to ask his counsel to present his argument through a video link.

The court, after hearing arguments, reserved its verdict and fixed May 29 for its announcement.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2024