Supreme Court Dismisses
Imran Khan's Plea in Toshakhana Trial
Earlier, the Supreme Court
had rejected Imran Khan's request to stay the trial in the Toshakhana case
being heard in an Islamabad sessions court. However, the court had granted him
relief by postponing further proceedings until that day (Friday), allowing him
to approach the court again if an adverse order was issued by the IslamabadHigh Court (IHC).
On Thursday, the IHC had
reserved its verdict on a set of petitions filed by Imran Khan against the
Toshakhana trial. The IHC was also expected to issue the verdict on Imran's
appeal against the trial court's decision to refuse his right to produce
witnesses in the case.
During the hearing in the
Supreme Court, the judges discussed the status of the pleas pending in the IHC
and whether the high court had issued any stay order. The court observed that
the trial court could not make a decision on the Toshakhana case until the IHC
gave its verdict.
Advocate Khawaja Haris
represented Imran Khan, while Advocate Amjad Pervaiz represented the Election
Commission of Pakistan (ECP) during the hearing.
The Toshakhana case is
based on a criminal complaint filed by the ECP, alleging that Imran Khan
deliberately concealed details of gifts he retained from the Toshakhana during
his tenure as prime minister. The ECP found him disqualified under Article
63(1)(p) of the Constitution for making false statements about the gifts.
In conclusion, the Supreme
Court dismissed Imran Khan's plea and expressed hope that both the trial court
and the IHC would make their decisions as per the law. The court clarified that
this decision would not affect any other pleas filed by Imran Khan. The
Toshakhana case involves allegations of Imran Khan's retention of gifts and has
been the subject of various legal issues leading to his disqualification.
The Toshakhana case was
initiated based on a criminal complaint filed by the Election Commission of
Pakistan (ECP). The complaint alleged that Imran Khan, during his time as the
Prime Minister, had deliberately concealed details of gifts he received from
the Toshakhana. The Toshakhana is a repository where presents given to
government officials from foreign dignitaries are kept. According to the
Toshakhana rules, gifts and other materials received by eligible individuals
should be reported to the Cabinet Division.
Imran Khan faced multiple
legal issues over his retention of gifts, leading to his disqualification by
the Election Commission of Pakistan. On October 21, 2022, the ECP concluded
that Imran Khan had made "false statements and incorrect
declarations" regarding the gifts he received. The ECP cited Article
63(1)(p) of the Constitution, which deals with disqualification for giving
false statements, as grounds for his disqualification.
The ECP approached the
Islamabad sessions court with a copy of the complaint, seeking proceedings
against Imran Khan under criminal law for allegedly misleading officials about
the gifts he received from foreign dignitaries while serving as the Prime
Minister. On May 10, Imran Khan was indicted in the case, but his petition to
declare the Toshakhana case inadmissible was rejected.
However, on July 4, the
Islamabad High Court (IHC) overturned the session court's ruling, making the
Toshakhana case maintainable against Imran Khan. Subsequently, the former Prime
Minister challenged the session court's verdict in the IHC.
On Thursday, the IHC
reserved its verdict on a set of petitions filed by Imran Khan against the
Toshakhana trial. The court was also expected to issue the verdict on Imran's
appeal against the trial court's decision to refuse his right to produce
witnesses in the case.
On the day of the Supreme
Court hearing, Imran Khan's plea against the trial proceedings was dismissed
after he withdrew the petition. Earlier, the Supreme Court had denied his
request to stay the trial but had granted relief by postponing further
proceedings until that day. The court reconstituted the bench, with Justice
Hasan Azhar Rizvi replacing Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi.
During the hearing, the
judges discussed the status of the pleas in the IHC and whether the high court
had issued any stay order. The court observed that the trial court could not
proceed with its verdict until the IHC gave its decision.
0 Comments