![court-frees-imran-khan-and-bushra-bibi-in-marriage-case](https://thepakistan.pk/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/image-800x533-2024-07-13T193305.111.png)
court-frees-imran-khan-and-bushra-bibi-in-marriage-case
A court in Pakistan has said that Imran Khan, who used to be the country’s leader, and his wife Bushra Bibi are not guilty in a case about their marriage. The judge said they should be let out of jail if they’re not being held for any other reasons.
What Was the Case About?
Bushra Bibi’s ex-husband said that Imran and Bushra got married too soon after her divorce. In Muslim law, there’s a waiting period called “Iddat” that women are supposed to follow after a divorce before marrying again. The ex-husband said they didn’t wait long enough.
What Happened Before?
- In February, another court said Imran and Bushra were guilty.
- They were given a punishment of seven years in jail and had to pay a fine.
- Many people thought this was unfair and spoke out against it.
Today’s Court Hearing
The lawyers for both sides talked to the judge about the case. They discussed:
- Whether the marriage was legal
- If there was enough proof of wrongdoing
- What Islamic law says about divorce and remarriage
The judge listened to everyone and then made his decision.
Why This Matters
Imran Khan used to be a very important person in Pakistan’s government. Any case involving him gets a lot of attention. This decision could affect how people see him and the legal system in Pakistan.
What Happens Next?
If Imran and Bushra are not in jail for any other reasons, they should be set free soon. But there might be other cases against them that could keep them in trouble with the law.
Easy Explanation of Some Terms
- Iddat: A waiting period in Muslim law for women after a divorce or their husband’s death.
- PPC: Pakistan Penal Code, the main criminal law book for Pakistan.
- IHC: Islamabad High Court, an important court in Pakistan’s capital city.
This case shows how complicated laws about marriage can be, especially when politics are involved. It’s a reminder that even former leaders have to follow the rules, but also that courts can change their minds when they look at cases again.