ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC), Wednesday, rejected founder Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Imran Khan and his spouse Bushra Bibi’s request to transfer their petitions seeking acquittal in the Toshakhana-II case, to another bench.
A single bench of Justice Inaam Ameen Minhas issued written order in the petition filed by Imran and Bushra through Barrister Salman Safdar and Khalid Yousaf Choudhary advocate and directed the petitioners’ counsels to provide “further assistance.”
In his written order, Justice Minhas mentioned that counsel for the petitioner at the very outset, submitted that this matter may kindly be placed before the chief justice for appropriate orders on the grounds that earlier the connected matters emanating from Toshakhana-II trial pending before the Senior Special Judge Central were heard and decided by another bench of this Court.
The counsel further submitted that the instant criminal revision was earlier placed as an Objection Case No. 671 of 2025 before another Bench of this Court and then transferred to this Bench. He added that the petitioner is a former chairman of PTI and a renowned leader a political party, who has now filed a constitutional petition under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 which has been numbered as 1925 of 2025 questioning the transparency and legitimacy of the appointments of judges of High Court pursuant to the 26th Amendment in the Constitution, which took place on 21.10.2024.
The counsel continued that a similar matter; i.e., PSLA No9-2024 concerning the same parties was placed before Bench-IX on 27.01.2025, wherein, similar objections were raised and the matter was placed before the chief justice for appropriate orders.
Justice Minhas observed that the primary objection by the counsel for the petitioner is that this bench should not hear the matter, as at the bail stage, the matter was heard by another bench of this Court.
He added, “This Bench, prima facie, is of the view that Zubair’s case is not applicable when it comes to any proceedings arising out of order of trial court and is confined only to the bail application. In somewhat similar circumstances, such like objections were raised before this Court and this Court has dealt with the matters strenuously by turning down such objections.”
“In this regard, reference is made to case reported as Muhammad Azam Khan Swati Vs The State (2023 P.Cr. LJ 350), order dated 06.11.2024 in case titled Ashba Kamran Vs. Election Commission of Pakistan through its Office in Islamabad; etc., (Diary No.20062- 2024), order dated 02.02.2023 in case titled Muhammad Sajid Vs. Imran Ahmed Khan Niazi and others (W.P. No.3061-2022) and order dated 29.04.2024 in case titled Bushra Imran Khan Vs. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Interior and Secretary, Ministry of Defence& others (W.P. No.2758- 2023),” maintained the bench.
It said; moreover, there are judgments of Supreme Court as well, which clearly provide that it is the prerogative of the Bench, hearing the matter, whether to recuse himself or remit the matter to the Chief Justice for entrustment of the same to another bench.
The bench concluded that however, it is felt that counsel for the petitioner should have an ample opportunity to present his case in light of the precedents on the subject; hence, further assistance is required.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Comments