ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) issued notices in Imran Khan plea to direct the trial court not to pass the final verdict in Toshakhana-II case.
A single bench of Justice Inaam Ameen Minhas on Tuesday heard the acquittal petitions of PTI founder and Bushra Bibi in the Toshakhana-II case.
During the hearing, PTI founder’s counsel Salman Safdar requested the court to stop the trial court from giving the final verdict in the case. To this, the court remarked that they would look into it.
Salman Safdar argued that Toshakhana cases were filed against his client and now the trial of Toshakhana-II is in its final stages. He added that first, one case was filed and then another. After the conviction in Toshakhana-I, the division bench of the high court suspended the conviction, he argued.
The court inquired as to what charges had been made against the petitioner. The lawyer said that the client is accused of accepting gifts, including a jewellery set.
Safdar pointed out that Inaamullah Shah, was the same witness who recorded his statement in earlier Toshakhana cases. He said Bushra Bibi was acquitted in the Iddat case and allowed to return home, but was re-arrested at Adiala Jail’s Gate No. 5 right after her release.
He further argued that during the initial investigation, all gifts were gathered but the Bulgari set was set aside for later review. He said there is hardly any agency in Islamabad that has not investigated the Toshakhana case — first the NAB, followed by FIA and now even Kohsar Police Station is involved.
Highlighting the issue of double jeopardy, Safdar said, “All these investigations revolve around one central point — NAB. NAB began the probe, then FIA took over. Under the law, a person cannot be punished multiple times for the same offence.”
Safdar contended that there are 35 witnesses in total, out of which 19 have recorded their statements and now the questionnaire for the accused has been received, with responses due the next day, and possibly sentencing the day after. He added that if a stay is not granted, then his arguments serve no purpose.
Referring to a previous bail decision by Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, Safdar read out two paragraphs and said both accused were granted bail in this case by the same judge. “I have five layers of legal protection,” he added.
Justice Inaam stated, “That was a bail matter. But this may involve a violation of rules. Is there no statutory safeguard here?” Safdar responded, “If someone hides the fact that they received a gift, a case can be made. But if someone openly declares it, then there is no case.”
Justice Inaam directed Imran’s lawyer to file all references relevant to the case and adjourned the hearing for an indefinite period.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.