Imran, Bushra re-arrested after Iddat acquittal

• Judge dismisses Khawar Maneka’s accusations that Nikah was performed fraudulently
• NAB detains couple on charges of selling state gifts
• Omar condemns Bushra’s arrest from outside Adiala Jail

ISLAMABAD: Former prime minister Imran Khan and his wife, Bushra Bibi, were acquitted in the Iddat case by a sessions court on Saturday, less than 24 hours after the Supreme Court ruled in favour of PTI on reserved seats.

However, their relief was short-lived as the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) arrested Mr Khan on charges related to the sale of state gifts. Bushra Bibi was also rearrested in this case when she was being released from Gate No. 3 of Adiala Jail.

Sources said that NAB took Bushra Bibi into custody after the bureau’s chairman issued arrest warrants for her and Mr Khan. Both are to be investigated within Adiala Jail.

Opposition leader Omar Ayub Khan condemned Bushra Bibi’s arrest and criticised the Adiala Jail’s administration. He also warned the jail superintendent of consequences and said that a privilege motion would be moved against him.

Mr Khan and Bushra Bibi’s acquittal in the Iddat case came after Additional District and Sessions Judge (ADSJ) Mohammad Afzal Majoka overturned their previous conviction, which had sentenced them to seven years of imprisonment on Feb 3, just five days before the general election.

Mr Khan’s lawyers, Usman Gill and Zaheer Abbas, were present in the courtroom when the judgement was announced.

In the 28-page verdict, Judge Majoka rejected the allegations of Khawar Fareed Maneka, Bushra Bibi’s ex-husband, that the nikah of Mr Khan and Bushra Bibi was fraudulently performed and that Mr Maneka was deprived of ruju (reconciliation rights) as per religious law.

The court also rejected the allegation of fornication under Section 496-B of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), saying that no charge was framed under this section against both Mr Khan and his spouse “because there was no evidence of second witness”. The only witness who testified before the trial court was Mr Maneka’s domestic servant.

“In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the appellants committed fornication,” the court ruled. As far as the charge of contracting marriage fraudulently during the Iddat period, the judge was of the view that in a video produced as evidence during the trial, Mr Maneka praised his ex-wife, Bushra Bibi, and “deposed that his ex-wife is a pious lady”.

The judge questioned “how this witness [Mr Maneka] can claim that the appellant No. 2 [Bushra Bibi] committed fraud with him”.

The court ruled: “From a perusal of Section 496 PPC and the above-mentioned esteemed citations, this court is of the view that the appellants have not gone through any marriage ceremony fraudulently or with dishonest intention because none of the parties claimed that nikah was not performed and fraudulently he or she was supposed to believe that marriage ceremony was solemnised.”

The court order added: “In the instant case, it is the case of the complainant that on Jan 1, 2018, the nikah of the appellants was performed, and then the second nikah was performed in February 2018. In this way, by no stretch of imagination, it was a marriage with dishonest or fraudulent intention.”

In response to Mr Maneka’s assertion that he was deprived of reconciliation rights and thus was defrauded by Mr Khan and Ms Bibi, the court noted that during the cross-examination, Mr Maneka deposed that he came to know the appellants’ marriage on the second day of their nikah.

The judge questioned why Mr Maneka remained silent about his reconciliation rights for six years before filing the complaint.

The judge noted that the “complainant has failed to prove his case against the appellants. Accordingly, both the appeals filed by appellant No. 1 [Imran Khan] and No. 2 [Bushra Bibi] are accepted, the judgement of the learned trial court dated Feb 3, 2024, is set aside, and consequently, both the appellants are acquitted of the charge”.

The court ordered their release unless they were required to be detained in other cases.

Published in Dawn, July 14th, 2024