• PTI founder, wife file plea in IHC seeking relief on medical grounds, legal flaws in trial court verdict
• Ex-PM submits separate petition for early hearing of £190m corruption case

ISLAMABAD: Former prime minister and PTI founder Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi have approached the Islamabad High Court (IHC) seeking the suspension of their sentences in the Toshakhana 2 (Bulgari jewellery) case, citing grave medical concerns and what their counsel termed legal infirmities in the trial court verdict.

Advocate Salman Akram Raja, along with Barristers Salman Safdar, Gohar Ali Khan and Qausain Faisal Mufti, filed the petition under Section 426 read with Section 561-A of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898, praying for the release of the petitioners till the final adjudication of their criminal appeal.

On Dec 20 last year, the Special Court Central-I judge convicted the couple, handing down a 10-year simple imprisonment term under Section 409 PPC (criminal breach of trust by a public servant), along with a fine of Rs16.425 million. Additionally, Mr Khan and Bushra Bibi were sentenced to seven years’ simple imprisonment under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.

The petition contended that the conviction under two separate enactments for the same alleged act violated the principle of double jeopardy enshrined in Section 26 of the General Clauses Act, 1897.

“Such dual conviction for the same alleged act is wholly beyond the mandate of law, as the petitioner could, at best, have been convicted under either of the two provisions, but not under both,” the petition argued. Medical grounds formed a significant part of the suspension plea. Citing proceedings before the Supreme Court on Feb 10, 2025, wherein the lead counsel for Mr Khan was appointed as amicus curiae, the petition noted that a medical report submitted by Dr Muhammad Arif of the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (Pims) revealed severe damage to the PTI founder’s right eye. The petition further argued that the trial court erred in Mr Khan to be a “public servant” within the meaning of Section 21 PPC, relying upon PLD 2024 SC 102 and Indian Supreme Court precedent.

It was contended that elected holders of public office did not qualify as public servants for the purpose of Section 409 PPC.

The petition maintained that gifts received from the Toshakhana were duly deposited and retained after payment of 50pc of the value exceeding the basic exemption of Rs30,000, strictly in accordance with the Toshakhana Policy 2018.

It also raised objections to the treatment of prosecution witness Sohaib Abbasi as an approver, contending that the mandatory procedure under Section 337 CrPC was not followed. It was argued that witness Syed Inamullah Shah, being a material participant in the alleged transaction, ought to have been arrayed as an accused rather than examined as a routine prosecution witness, reflecting a “selective approach manifestly demonstrative of mala fide intent”.

It highlighted that they remained on bail throughout the trial and faithfully complied with all terms and conditions imposed by the trial court. The accompanying criminal appeal assails the conviction on substantial questions of law and fact, with no likelihood of immediate hearing, necessitating the suspension of the sentence to prevent a “manifest miscarriage of justice”.

The former PM and his spouse also filed separate petitions for the early hearing of the £190m corruption case. The registrar’s office is likely to place this matter before the bench next week.

Published in Dawn, February 15th, 2026