In a distressing incident, lawyers affiliated with Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) reportedly assaulted Khawar Maneka, the former husband of Bushra Bibi, within the premises of a court. This occurred as Maneka attended a hearing regarding the validity of his previous marriage in a district and sessions court in Islamabad.
The altercation unfolded during the appeals hearing of Bushra Bibi and her spouse, PTI founder Imran Khan, regarding their conviction in a case concerning Islamic legal requirements following divorce. However, Judge Shahrukh Arjumand adjourned the session abruptly without delivering a verdict, retreating to his chamber.
Subsequently, chaos ensued within the courtroom as PTI lawyers allegedly threw bottles and engaged in physical violence against Maneka, causing him to collapse on the floor.
The incident highlights a concerning escalation within the legal proceedings, marked by aggression and disruption. It underscores tensions surrounding high-profile cases and raises questions about the conduct and decorum expected within the legal environment.
The Case
According to the court’s written order, Imran and Bushra Bibi were convicted under Section 496 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) for engaging in a marriage ceremony without lawful marriage consent. This section is legally distinct from zina, which arises from the absence of a valid marriage contract.
The court’s order also stipulated that failure to pay fines would result in a further four-month imprisonment. Pakistan’s higher courts have clarified that formalizing a nikah during iddat does not automatically annul a marriage; it is considered irregular but not void under legal interpretation.
The charges, initially framed by Judge Qudratullah based on a complaint filed by Maneka in November, included PPC Sections 34 (common intention), 496, and 496-B (fornication). However, the 496-B charge was later dropped by the Islamabad High Court (IHC).
After the couple’s indictment, the IHC halted proceedings on January 19 and prohibited the prosecution from presenting evidence. While the IHC declined to dismiss the case, citing already framed charges by the trial court, it provided some relief by removing the “illegitimate relations” charge (section 496-B of the PPC), not included by the trial court.
IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq disposed of Bushra Bibi’s petition, noting that the proper procedure was not followed to invoke section 496-B.
