Categories Courts

IHC reveals reasons for Imran’s bail, terms Toshakhana II case matter of further inquiry

Issuing a 14-page verdict on Monday, Islamabad High Court recorded reasons behind granting extraordinary relief of post arrest bail to former Prime Minister Imran Khan in Tosha Khana II case, categorically saying the matter is of further inquiry.
A single-member bench of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) comprising Justice Miangul Aurangzaib stated in the detailed decision that no action can be taken for not depositing the gift of a Bulgarian jewelry set set in the Tosha Khana. The bench added that when action cannot be taken for not depositing the gift, then this is a case for further inquiry.
It has been stated in the verdict that the former prime minister and his wife are accused of not depositing a gift of a Bulgarian jewelry set from the Saudi Crown Prince in the Tosha Khana. It added that prima facie, the non-deposit of gifts in state depository does not entail “appropriate action” under the relevant rules.
The bench said in its verdict in the matter that the petitioner (Imran Khan) is of 72 years of age whereas his wife was granted post arrest bail in the same matter saying, “Bearing in mind the principles of consistency as well as my tentative view that this is the case of further inquiry, post-arrest bail was granted to the petitioner vide short order”
The bench noted that the Cabinet Divisions’ Office Memorandum (OM) dated March 18, 2023 was to have effect from February 22, 2023. It added, “FIA special prosecutor submitted very fairly that the said OM dated 18.03.2023 does not have retrospective effect so as to be made applicable to the case against the petitioner which took place almost two years before the said O.M. was issued.”
The court further noted: “The fact that the OM does not make the non-deposit of the gift with the Toshakhana /Cabinet Division liable to “appropriate action” under “the relevant rules,” this would, in my tentative view, make the case against the petitioner as one of further inquiry.”
It is pertinently mentioned that in November last year, the IHC approved the bail plea of the PTI founder in the new Toshakhana case. The court accepted Khan’s bail plea against two surety bonds worth Rs1 million each.
Imran Khan and the former first lady Bushra Bibi were taken into custody in the case on July 13, 2024, the same day the couple was acquitted in the Iddat case. However, Khan’s wife secured bail in the case from the IHC in October last year.
The bench said in the verdict that Imran Khan is 72 years old and has been in custody for more than four months in this case. The verdict mentioned that after the case was transferred to the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), the investigating officer did not feel the need to question Imran Khan. Giving another reason to grant post arrest bail to the petitioner, the bench said that the top anti-graft body has filed reference against Imran Khan and documentary evidence of this case is already in the possession of the prosecution so there is no fear of tampering evidence of the case. The bench directed Imran Khan to appear before the trial court for adjudication in the matter saying if the petitioner misuses the concession of the bail, the prosecution can file a petition for cancellation of the bail.

Author

Khudayar Mohla, Managing Partner Mohla & Mohla, Founder of the Law Today Pakistan,

Managing Partner at Mohla & Mohla - Advocates and Legal Consultants, Islamabad, Founder of The Law Today Pakistan (TLTP) Newswire Service. Former President Press Association of Supreme Court of Pakistan with over two decades of coverage of defining judicial moments - including the dissolution and restoration of Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Asif Ali Zardari NAB cases, Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani contempt proceedings, Panama Papers case against Mian Nawaz Sharif, matters involving Imran Khan, and the high treason trial of former Army Chief and President Pervez Musharraf. He now practises law and teaches Jurisprudence, International Law, Civil and Criminal Law. Can be reached at: mohla@lawtoday.com.pk

More From Author

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like

Khudayar Mohla, Sindh High Court, SHC Karachi, Federal Investigation Agency, FIA Pakistan, Pest Management Services (Private) Limited, Methyl Bromide import, illegal Indian imports, Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry, Justice Abdul Mobeen Lakho, Enquiry No. ENQ-ACC-KHI-1/26, Imports and Exports (Control) Act 1950, Federal Investigation Agency Act 1974, Agricultural Pesticides Ordinance 1971, Section 160 CrPC, writ petition dismissal, jurisdictional challenge, forged import permits, trade with India, Anti-Corruption Circle Karachi, pesticide import regulations, chemical smuggling investigation, Paras Ali Lodhi, Saddam Hussain Chang, Shazia Hanjra Deputy Attorney General, Department of Plant Protection, Pakistan trade law, industrial chemical enquiry.

SHC Upholds FIA Jurisdiction in Probe into Prohibited Chemical Imports

KARACHI: While dismissing a plea seeking directives against the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), a division…

Khudayar Mohla, Supreme Court Pakistan, Sindh High Court contempt case, contempt of court Pakistan, preliminary hearing requirement, Article 204 Constitution Pakistan, Contempt of Court Ordinance 2003, Supreme Court verdict 2026, SHC orders set aside, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hira Rauf case, Mushtaq Ahmed case Pakistan, procedural law Pakistan, prima facie case law, contempt proceedings Pakistan, judicial procedure Pakistan, intra court appeal Pakistan, legal lapses in court orders, due process in contempt cases, Pakistan judiciary news, Supreme Court rulings Pakistan, constitutional law Pakistan, legal rights of accused contemnor

SC Sets Aside SHC Verdict, Rules Preliminary Hearing Mandatory Before Framing Charge in Contempt Proceedings

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has set aside Sindh High Court orders in a contempt matter,…

khudayar Mohla, Justice Jawad Hassan,Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed, Sheikh Rasheed Umrah travel ban, Lahore High Court Rawalpindi Bench, LHC Rawalpindi verdict, Anti-Terrorism Court Pakistan, Section 28-A Anti-Terrorism Act 1997, ATA passport impoundment, Justice Jawad Hassan, Justice Tariq Mahmood Bajwa, Intra Court Appeal Pakistan, ICA No 76 2025, Division Bench LHC, passport impounded by operation of law, freedom of movement Article 15 Constitution Pakistan, reasonable restriction fundamental rights Pakistan, Provincial National Identification List, PNIL Pakistan, Exit Control List Pakistan, ECL Pakistan, no estoppel against law Pakistan, judicial estoppel Pakistan, writ petition LHC, constitutional jurisdiction High Court Pakistan, Additional Attorney General Pakistan, Federal Investigation Agency Pakistan, FIA passport impounding, anti-terrorism law Pakistan, charge-sheeted accused travel ban Pakistan, ATC permission travel abroad, Umrah travel permission Pakistan court, legislative intent Section 28-A, mandatory legal presumption ATA, appellate jurisdiction LHC, Law Reforms Ordinance 1972, Pakistan terrorism trial travel restrictions, criminal justice Pakistan, passport impounding terrorism accused, Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed court case, Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed 2025 2026, LHC sets aside Umrah permission, Pakistan court ruling travel ban, Pakistan High Court anti-terrorism verdict

LHC Rawalpindi Bench Sets Aside Sheikh Rasheed’s Umrah Travel Order, Rules ATC is Sole Authority for Passport Impoundment Under Anti-Terrorism Law

RAWALPINDI: While interpreting the legislative intent behind Section 28-A of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, read…