Court rejects Imran and Bushra’s requests to stay verdict in Iddat case

ISLAMABAD – Additional District and Sessions Judge Afzal Majoka yesterday rejected the requests of PTI founding chairman Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi seeking suspension of their sentences in the illegal marriage case.

The verdict was announced last Tuesday after the legal team of the former First Couple and the plaintiff Khawar Maneka presented the arguments. Imran Khan and Bushra were sentenced to seven years imprisonment each and a fine of Rs 0.5 million on February 3 after a court hearing at Adyala Jail in Rawalpindi.

A large number of national and international journalists, PTI lawyers and police officers were present in the courtroom.

On Thursday, Judge Majoka said that a copy of the detailed judgment would be issued shortly and that both plaintiffs’ applications had been dismissed before leaving the courtroom.

Later, a 10-page judgment was released which stated that it was the established law that while deciding an application for bail or suspension of sentence during an appeal, the facts of the case cannot be mentioned or commented on in detail. The facts of the case cannot be discussed while deciding an application under Section 496 CrPC.

The judgment further stated that the contention that the powers conferred on the appellate court under Section 426 CrPC to suspend sentence pending hearing of an appeal are wider than the power to grant bail under Sections 497 and 498 CrPC does not hold water. It further stated that a person convicted of such an offence is not entitled to bail under Section 426 CrPC unless there are cogent reasons why the conviction cannot be sustained.

The ruling also cited case law that said the presumption of innocence only applies to defendants during trial, not to the convicted person. It went on to say that in previous rulings, requests for parole were accepted when plaintiffs had already served most of their sentence.

The order also states that the appeals filed by both the plaintiffs are appeals from the Islamabad High Court and must be decided before July 12. There is a case law in which no decision was taken on the suspension of sentence because the main appeal before the higher courts was time-barred.

At the end of the verdict, it was stated that there was no reason for either plaintiff to suspend their sentence. Accordingly, the applications under Section 426 of the Criminal Code were rejected.