ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday adjourned the hearing of the suspension of sentence applications filed by Imran Khan and his spouse, Bushra Bibi, in the £190 million case, after the defence counsel sought time to obtain fresh instructions from his clients.
A division bench headed by IHC Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar and including Justice Muhammad Asif presided over the proceedings.
During the hearing, defence counsel Salman Safdar appeared alongside National Accountability Bureau (NAB) Special Prosecutor Javed Ashraf and prosecutor Rafay Maqsood. The hearing was also attended by the PTI founder’s sisters, Aleema Khanum, Uzma Khan and Noreen Niazi.
At the outset, the NAB prosecutor argued that two separate applications for suspension of sentence had already been filed, stressing that such pleas could not be heard without issuance of notice in the main appeals, particularly after recent amendments to the NAB law.
He urged the court to proceed with arguments on the appeals if the defence was ready.
Responding to this, Barrister Safdar contended that his clients were convicted on Jan 17, 2025, and despite the passage of over a year, the prosecution had repeatedly sought adjournments. He maintained that the defence had remained present throughout and pressed for suspension of sentence and release on bail, also citing medical grounds.
The bench, however, questioned whether the defence could proceed with arguments on the main appeals against the conviction, even suggesting allocation of two hearing days per week.
Safdar replied that he had not been able to meet or obtain instructions from Imran and Bushra Bibi for the past five months, making it difficult to proceed on the appeals at this stage.
Justice Dogar observed that if the appeals were fixed for hearing, the suspension of sentence applications might not be taken up separately. Safdar reiterated that he could not advance arguments without consulting his clients and sought time for that purpose.
The NAB prosecutor countered that while bail matters are brief, appeals require detailed arguments, questioning the defence’s reluctance to proceed if the case was indeed straightforward.
After hearing both sides, the bench allowed time to the defence to consult their clients and adjourned the proceedings until April 6 (Monday).
