ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC), Monday, issued notices to the respondents in Bushra Bibi’s petition challenging the trial court’s order in Iddat case.
A single bench of Justice Tariq Mahmood Jahangiri heard the petition moved by Bushra Bibi, the wife of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan seeking dismissal of the plea filed by ex-husband Khawar Maneka against the “fraudulent marriage” between her and Khan.
Through the instant petition, the petitioner challenged the order dated 11.12.2023, passed by Senior Civil Judge-II, East-Islamabad, whereby, complaint filed by respondent No2 was admitted and process under Section 204 CrPC has been issued against the petitioner to face trial, as well as the order dated 11.01.2024, passed by Additional Sessions Judge-V, East-Islamabad, whereby, revision filed by the petitioner was dismissed.
The petitioner’s counsel contended that the main allegation levelled in the complaint filed by Maneka is that he pronounced divorce upon the petitioner on 14.11.2017, she solemnized Nikah with Imran Khan on 01.01.2018, so the marriage was not legally valid, and the parties have committed an act of fornication and petitioner is liable to be punished for committing such offence, whereas, counsel has placed reliance on a case reported as “Allah Dad v.
Mukhtar and another” (1992 SCMR 1273), wherein, 39 days Iddat period is provided, whereas,Nikkah between the parties, as per contentions and allegations levelled in the complaint by respondent No2, was solemnized after 48 days.
He further submitted that in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, no act of fornication or unlawful marriage has been committed, marriage is valid/legal and the contents of the complaint filed by respondent No2, are false; other allegation levelled in the complaint is that before performance of Nikkah, the petitioner has committed an offence of fornication with Imran Khan, it is categorically provided in Section 203(C)(2) of CrPC.
The presiding officer of a court taking cognisance of an offence shall at once examine on oath the complainant and at least two eye-witnesses to the act of fornication”, whereas the trial court has examined three witnesses and not examined the two eye-witnesses regarding the commission of the act of fornication, only one witness namely, Muhammad Latif has got recorded his statement and the allegations levelled in the statement are bald and frivolous and not supported by any evidence, so in light of the relevant provisions of CrPC as well as PPC, the impugned orders are liable to be set-aside and complaint filed by respondent No2 is liable to be quashed.
After hearing the arguments, the IHC bench issued notices to the respondents and deferred the hearing of the case till January 17.
Bushra Bibi filed the petition through her lawyer Barrister Salman Akram Raja and requested the IHC to dismiss the admissibility of the case, stating that a trial court has no jurisdiction to hear it.
In her plea, she mentioned that in their judgments the high courts declared marriages in Iddat to be irregular, not annulled.
The petition further contested that Bushra’s ex-husband filed a complaint under malice for nefarious purposes, falsely alleging marriage during Iddat on the basis of false and fabricated documents.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2024
Comments
Comments are closed.