Contempt case: ECP gets time on Imran plea against jail trial

LAHORE: A Lahore High Court (LHC) full bench on Monday allowed an opportunity to the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) to submit a reply to a petition of former prime minister Imran Khan challenging his jail trial in a contempt case by the commission.

The bench, comprising Justice Aalia Neelum, Justice Shehram Sarwar Chaudhry and Justice Asjad Javed Ghural, heard the petition.

A counsel for the ECP appeared before the bench and sought an adjournment to furnish reply to the petition.

The bench allowed the request and adjourned the hearing for a week.

The petition by Mr Khan contended that the ECP, on Nov 30, 2023, had passed the order to conduct the trial at the Adiala Jail on account of unspecified security concerns. It pleaded that the ECP failed to appreciate that a jail trial would violate several fundamental rights of the petitioner, adding that the ECP incorrectly held that it could order a trial in secret and in jail. It argued that a jail trial was a violation of Article 10-A of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to fair trial and due process of law.

The petition asked the court to set aside the ECP decision and direct it to hold an open and public trial of Imran with full access to his legal team, media and public.

BUSHRA: An LHC division bench dismissed for non-prosecution an intra-court appeal (ICA) by a lawyer seeking record of the divorce between Bushra Bibi, the wife of PTl Chairman Imran Khan, and her former husband, Khawar Farid Maneka.

The bench, headed by Justice Shehram Sarwar Chaudhry, took up the appeal, however, the appellant did not appear despite the case being called twice.

Previously, a single bench had dismissed a writ petition of the lawyer with an observation that objection to a divorce certificate could only be raised by the members of the family concerned.

In his petition, the lawyer pleaded that divorce becomes effective, under the law, after being registered in the union council concerned. He said the period of Iddat starts after the documentation of divorce is submitted in the office of the relevant union council.

He alleged that the legal requirements in the divorce of Maneka and Bushra Bibi were not fulfilled as admitted by Maneka in a TV programme that the Iddat was not completed.

He asked the court to seek a clarification from Maneka and to summon the record of the union council for further verification of the divorce.