PTI Chairman Imran Khan approached the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday seeking the recusal of Chief Justice Aamer Farooq from the bench hearing petitions against the Toshakhana reference in the interest of a “fair and impartial” trial.

The reference alleges that Imran had “deliberately concealed” details of the gifts he retained from the Toshaskhana — a repository where presents handed to government officials from foreign officials are kept — during his time as the prime minister and proceeds from their reported sales.

Imran has faced a number of legal issues over his retention of gifts. The issue also led to his disqualification by the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) in the past. Last month, the PTI chief was indicted in the case.

Subsequently, three identical petitions related to the said case against Imran’s indictment and one seeking transfer of his case to another judge were filed in the IHC. After hearing the pleas, the court had temporarily halted criminal proceedings against the PTI chairman.

In a petition filed through Barrister Gohar Khan today, Imran said the arguments in the cases were yet to be completed as he sought the recusal of Justice Farooq from the bench on the grounds of “fair hearing, unbiased tribunal, access to justice and impartial proceedings”.

The plea, a copy of which is available with Dawn.com, said the applicant had raised several legal and constitutional questions in the subject cases.

“The issues are unprecedented and their implications are far-reaching; the bench to decide these issues must, therefore, not only be unbiased and impartial, in fact but must also be seen to be unbiased and impartial,” it stated, highlighting that “this is a long-standing principle” reiterated in several landmark judgments of the superior courts and applied to all proceedings.

The petition went on to say that Imran believed he would not get “fair and impartial” justice from the bench.

It further stated that the writ petition against the ECP was pending and its withdrawal was not decided yet, forcing the applicant to face the trial before the additional sessions judge without it being decided whether the electoral body could have filed such a case in the first place.

“It is in the knowledge of this court that numerous FIRs were filed against the applicant and the applicant sought ‘appearance through video link’ and despite extreme urgency, the matter was not decided to date.”

The petition recalled that despite several requests, Imran’s biometric was not exempted, which affected his “right to justice”. It also stated that not declaring the PTI chief’s arrest from the IHC premises as illegal “speaks for itself”.

Permission for the entrance of Imran’s vehicle in court, it continued, was also not granted at a time when the former prime minister was in a wheelchair.

The plea also referred to the judgment issued by an IHC bench in the Tyrian White case, saying that the IHC CJ didn’t allow that to be published on the court’s website. “And when one of the learned judges directed the office to ‘upload the judgment’, it was taken down.

“That reflects adversely on the impartiality of the proceedings before this court,” it added.

“The applicant has strong legal and justifiable reasons to contend that hearing of revisions be adjourned till after the decision of the writ petition,” the petition contended, stating that matter related to the PTI chief’s liberty with his “entire political career at risk” and “entire legal edifice at stake”.

It said proceedings before the IHC CJ would “raise serious questions about his ability to consider the issues dispassionately and impartially”.

“The propriety, fairness, principles of impartiality and due process demand the IHC CJ to recuse himself from the hearing,” the petition added.

It subsequently prayed that Justice Farooq recuses himself from the bench hearing the case or pass an order to transfer it to another bench for further proceedings.

The plea is yet to be fixed for hearing.