Pakistan
Imran Khan, Bushra Bibi arrested in fresh Thoshakhana case
The latest reports say that a NAB team led by Deputy Director Mohsin Haroon carried out the process to take both Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi into custody
Islamabad: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Founder Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi were arrested in a fresh case of Toshakhana.
Both Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi were arrested soon after a local court in Islamabad acquitted them in the Iddat case.
The sources said that NAB Deputy Director Mohsin Haroon led the bureau’s team to Adiala where the PTI founder and his wife were arrested.
The sources said that NAB arrested the couple in connection with a new Toshakhana reference, alleging that they were involved in acquiring gifts from Toshakhana at a low price and selling them at a high price.
They said that as Prime Minister, the PTI founder and his wife obtained gifts from Toshakhana, and it is alleged that these gifts were acquired at a low price and sold at higher rates.
Earlier, investigating officers from the nine cases registered in Lahore also arrived at Adiala Jail. The Lahore police team reached Adiala Jail after obtaining permission from the Anti-Terrorism Court in Rawalpindi.
The sources said that Lahore police are likely to proceed with the arrest of the PTI founder.
After completing legal formalities, three members of the Lahore police team initially entered Adiala Jail.
Earlier in the day, a session court in Islamabad acquitted Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi in illegal marriage case, declaring their sentences null and void.
Islamabad Additional Sessions Judge Afzal Majoka heard the central appeals against the sentence against Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran and his wife Bushra Bibi in the Iddat Nikah case during which the lawyers of Khawar Manika and Imran Khan made arguments.
During the hearing, Khawar Manika's lawyer said that during the trial, the lawyers of Imran and Bushra were asked to bring witnesses, if they want to bring witnesses, then we have no objection, the court can take evidence at any time.
Manika's lawyer argued that you asked about Hanafi jurisprudence. Mufti Saeed also did not say that both are Hanafi. Salman Akram Raja says that his client Imran Khan got married, he does not know about Iddat. All the responsibility is being shifted on Bushra.
The lawyer further said in the argument that the husband is keeping aside the woman's sacrifices and saying, I have not done anything. The woman stood by her husband in difficult times, such cannot be expected from a leader. His wife left the comfort of Bani Gala and went to Adiala Jail. What will the wife think that she got this reward for love? On this, Judge Afzal remarked that it cannot be like this, if a marriage takes place, both are responsible.
Khawar's counsel said that he has no objection to the additional evidence of the appellants that they can adduce. It was stated by Bushra Bibi that she was verbally divorced in April 2017, which was admitted by Salman Akram. If the woman says that she was verbally divorced, will her verbal statement be trusted? There are court rulings regarding verbal divorce having no status, the law says documentary evidence will prevail over verbal.
The lawyer added that in which statement did Bushra say that the marriage did not take place during the Iddat. Mufti Saeed performed Nikah after her sister said that the essentials of marriage were complete. She did not say that her Iddat, the sister who said that the period was completed would have been brought as a witness.
On this, Judge Afzal Majoka said that it is the duty of the prosecution to prove that the period is not complete.
During the hearing, Bushra Bibi's lawyer said that we want to comply with the decision of the Islamabad High Court (IHC). ‘We are not seeking a remand back, but only want a decision on the merits. The judge said that the case was remanded on the basis that the certificate did not exist’.
Khawar’s lawyer said that on January 16, 2024, Bushra Bibi was charged and denied the health crime. Bushra Bibi, Imran Khan and the lawyer did not say that they got married over iddat completion. Where is the statement where it is written that she did not marry during the period of Iddat. Bushra Bibi's lawyer replied to this, in statement of 342, there is the statement of Bushra Bibi in question number 2.
Lawyer of Manika said that an objection was raised that a photocopy of the divorce certificate was presented in the court. It was written in the law of evidence that a copy of the copy would also be admissible, tampering was alleged. It could have been checked. I looked carefully and did not see any tampering.
The lawyer added that if the husband dies, the wife's Iddat will be four months. If three divorces are given simultaneously, it will be considered as one divorce. When the complainant stated on oath that he wanted to approach, the would be considered one divorce. I have not said anywhere that I am a follower of Hanafia or Shafi'i jurisprudence, I have lodged a complaint as a Muslim and want justice as per Islam.
He further said that founder PTI and Bushra Bibi were the best witnesses in this case, both of them would have testified in their own right on oath. Tampering of divorce deed was said but evidence was not presented. We are satisfied that there is no tempering on divorce deed. There was no divorce in April, but in November 2017. In the Holy Qur'an, the right to return during Iddat and second marriage is allowed after Iddat is completed. The second marriage cannot be decided during Iddat.
Judge Afzal Majoka asked that Bushra Bibi got married, Khawar Manika also got married? On this, the lawyer said that he did not know about that. The Qur'an says that a woman can get married when she completes her ‘iddat’.
Khawar Manika's lawyer raised the question that if the first Nikkah was performed, why was there a need for a second Nikkah. This means the first Nikkah was a fraud. My point is how much time was given to them for arguments, I was not given.
Imran Khan's lawyer Salman Akram Raja gave arguments in the reply that not issuing a notice to the Chairman Union Council is another crime and not fraud. If Khawar Manika did not give the notice of divorce, the question of 90 days does not arise. I read Section 7 of the Muslim Family Law which states that notice is not a mandatory condition. Even if their words are accepted, it can be called a legal error, but it cannot be called a fraudulent marriage. He said, “If there is a divorce, what does it mean that Manika and Bushra Bibi are still married? Because the notice is not sent yet. According to section 7, even today the divorce is not given by notice in villages”.
On this, Khawar Manika's lawyer said that during the trial witness Aun Chaudhry was not cross-examined regarding Iddat. Mufti Saeed was also not cross-examined regarding Iddat during the trial. The section 496 should also be included with 494. It has been explained that Khawar Manika intended to return.