2024-06-11 23:38:12
(24News) In the course of the listening to of petitions associated to the appeals in opposition to the sentence of PTI founder Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi within the Iddat marriage case within the Islamabad Excessive Courtroom, Bushra Bibi’s ex-husband Khawar Manika appeared within the safety fence.
Justice Mian Gul Hasan Aurangzeb of Islamabad Excessive Courtroom heard the petitions with the objections of the Registrar’s Workplace, within the petition of Bushra Bibi, it’s requested that the Excessive Courtroom ought to resolve on the petition for suspension of sentence pending within the Periods Courtroom, the case is returned. Periods Choose Shahrukh Arjumand ought to be ordered to pronounce a protected choice. In any other case, the Islamabad Excessive Courtroom itself ought to resolve after listening to the enchantment.
The Registrar’s Workplace has objected to the request that how can the Excessive Courtroom hear the matter pending within the Periods Courtroom?
In the course of the listening to, Salman Akram Raja appeared within the courtroom on behalf of the petitioners, who was requested by Justice Mian Gul Hasan Aurangzeb that what’s the objection to this petition?
Salman Akram Raja, founding father of PTI and Bushra Bibi replied that I’m telling the details why I’ve approached this courtroom, the executive order can not cease me from searching for judicial aid.
On this event, Khawar Maneka got here to the courtroom in Hissar Safety, on the earlier listening to PTI legal professionals had attacked Khawar Maneka, founding father of PTI and Bushra Bibi Salman Akram Raja stated that Periods Choose Shahrukh Arjumand sentenced him. A date was set for adjudication of appeals.
Justice Mian Gul Hasan Aurangzeb inquired that do you say that the matter ought to be despatched again to the Periods Choose or the Excessive Courtroom ought to hear it by itself?
Salman Akram Raja on behalf of founder PTI and Bushra Bibi continued the arguments and stated that the petition of founder PTI is being heard first.
The Chief Justice made an administrative order which we don’t have, the judgment was reserved after three months of steady hearings which weren’t delivered, on Could 29 the Periods Choose despatched a report back to the Chief Justice as a substitute of saying the judgment, solely after the arguments have been accomplished. The decision was but to return, on Could 29, the complainant got here to the courtroom and raised noise and expressed disbelief on the courtroom. On Could 23, the session choose stated that he would pronounce the decision on Could 29.
2024-06-11 23:38:12