ISLAMABAD: The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) on Wednesday rejected a plea moved by the spouse of incarcerated former prime minister Imran Khan, Bushra Bibi, seeking suspension of her seven-year sentence in the £190 Al-Qadir Trust case.
“We find no sufficient ground warranting interference with the April 30 Islamabad High Court (IHC) order at this stage,” FCC Chief Justice Aminuddin Khan observed, who headed the two-judge bench that rejected Bushra Bibi’s plea.
The IHC has declined to dismiss her plea for the suspension of her sentence as an appeal against her and Imran’s conviction remained pending before the high court.
The FCC bench, which included Justice Ali Baqar Najafi, expressed the expectation that the high court would endeavour to decide the main appeal against her conviction, affording both sides adequate opportunity of hearing while discouraging unnecessary adjournments.
Earlier in the day, the bench had reserved its ruling on the plea, which contended that Bushra Bibi, being a woman and in view of her serious medical condition, was entitled to the suspension of her sentence, as similar relief was contemplated under the first proviso to Section 497(1), CrPC, which deals with cases where bail may be granted in ease of a non-bailable offence.
In its three-page order, the FCC noted that the application seeking the suspension of the sentence had remained pending before the IHC on account of successive adjournments sought by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB).
It observed that, without entering into the merits of the application under Section 426 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the IHC had declined to suspend the sentence principally on the ground that the main appeal had already been fixed for hearing and the appellant’s counsel was not extending the requisite assistance towards its adjudication.
The record further reflected that the appeal, initially fixed for April 30, was subsequently adjourned to May 7 and thereafter to Oct 5.
The principal grievance urged by the counsel for the appellant pertained to the repeated adjournments allegedly sought by NAB, resulting in the prolongation of proceedings on the application for the suspension of her sentence, the FCC observed.
“Be that as it may, the main appeal having already been fixed for hearing, the appropriate course will be to secure its expeditious adjudication rather than undertake a parallel examination of the merits of the suspension of sentence at this stage,” the FCC stated.
The FCC order further said that the appellant’s assertion that the appeal involved a voluminous record necessitating elaborate arguments did not, by itself, furnished a sufficient justification for interference with the IHC order.
It was, therefore, incumbent upon the appellant’s counsel to extend full assistance to the IHC in hearing the main appeal, following which NAB would be equally obligated to advance its arguments without unnecessary adjournments, the FCC declared.
The FCC also noted that the criminal appeal before it was barred by 61 days, for which the appellant had sought condonation of delay.
The explanation furnished, particularly the appellant’s incarceration at the Adiala jail, constituted sufficient cause warranting the condonation, the FCC observed while condoning the delay.
The appeal
Moved under Section 32-A of the National Accountability Ordinance read with Article 175F(1)(a) of the Constitution, the criminal appeal pleaded before the FCC that, despite earlier directions issued by the IHC to the authorities of Central Jail Adiala to facilitate a meeting between the appellant and her counsel, the jail authorities were not complying with the directions.
Her counsel was instead permitted to meet the appellant’s husband, Imran Khan, who disclosed that both he and the appellant were being illegally kept in solitary confinement. They were allegedly denied access to family, friends, counsel and political party members, as well as to each other, and were not provided with books or television, thereby subjecting them to complete isolation from human contact and depriving them of information about the outside world.
The same was subsequently confirmed by the appellant’s daughters upon meeting her after her eye surgery on April 17, the appeal stated.
Such treatment amounted to an unauthorised enhancement of sentence, violated the prisoners’ fundamental rights to life and dignity guaranteed under Article 9 of the Constitution, and warranted immediate intervention by the FCC, the petition argued.
The appeal stated that the appellant had been subjected to continuous solitary confinement, which had demonstrably taken a grave toll on her physical and mental health. This was evident from the fact that she had to be taken outside the jail premises for eye surgery.
In view of her deteriorating medical condition, she ought not to be subjected to solitary confinement even if such punishment had been awarded by a court. However, in blatant disregard of the applicable law and prison rules, she continued to be subjected to such unlawful confinement, the petition pleaded.
The appeal contended that NAB had selectively prosecuted the appellant and her husband while deliberately excluding six other individuals who were allegedly implicated in the matter.
The core allegations revolved around the Malik Riaz family and other persons who had conspicuously not been subjected to prosecution. This selective and incomplete approach had resulted in a defective and biased investigation, culminating in the unjust framing of charges and subsequent conviction of the appellant, the appeal contended.
Thus, the prosecution had failed to present cogent, reliable and legally admissible evidence to substantiate the allegations in their entirety.
The former first lady was handed the sentence in the case in January last year, and remains imprisoned at Rawalpindi’s Adiala jail. In the case, the court had found Imran and Bushra guilty of giving undue favours to property tycoon Riaz in retrieving his laundered money from the United Kingdom.
Bushra, along with the ex-PM, had initially moved the IHC for the suspension of her sentence in July last year. But the high court dismissed their requests in May 2026, observing that their appeals against their convictions had already been fixed for hearing.
Subsequently, the two approached the Supreme Court (SC) against the IHC decision, but the SC office returned the petition as being not maintainable, explaining that since the IHC had passed the impugned order while exercising jurisdiction under Section 32 of the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO), 1999, the remedy lay exclusively before the FCC under Section 32-A of the ordinance.
Bushra then moved the FCC on July 30, with her criminal appeal contending that the appellant, being a woman with a serious medical condition, was entitled to the suspension of her sentence, as similar relief was contemplated under the first proviso to Section 497(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
Earlier this month, senior members of the PTI’s legal team approached the FCC for early fixation of the criminal appeal. However, no fresh application was filed, and only a verbal request was made for early registration and fixation of the case.
Her latest application for the appeal’s early hearing, which was rejected on Monday, also stated that her rapidly deteriorating ocular condition threatened her remaining eyesight.
The post FCC rejects Bushra Bibi's petition seeking suspension of 7-year Al-Qadir Trust sentence appeared first on Dawn – Home.
