The Lahore High Court (LHC) on Thursday confirmed the interim bail of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan in the Layyah land case. The court ordered the PTI chairman to furnish surety bonds of Rs 200,000 for availing the relief. Justice Muhammad Amjad Rafiq announced the verdict, reserved earlier in the day, after hearing detailed arguments of the parties, on the bail petition of the PTI chairman. The Anti-Corruption Establishment (ACE) Punjab had registered a case against Imran Khan, his sister Uzma Khan and others over alleged fraudulent practices in the purchase of 5,261-kanal of land in Layyah district, which is estimated to be worth billions of rupees. Meanwhile, the court also confirmed the interim bail of Bushra Bibi, the wife of PTI Chairman Imran Khan, in the Okara road corruption case. The court ordered Bushra Bibi to furnish surety bonds of Rs 200,000 for availing the relief. Justice Muhammad Amjad Rafiq announced the verdict, reserved earlier in the day, after hearing detailed arguments of the parties, on the bail petition. The ACE Punjab had registered a case against Bushra Bibi over alleged corruption in a road project in Okara. Meanwhile, a sessions court in Islamabad on Thursday accepted PTI Chairman Imran Khan’s plea for personal exemption from the Toshakhana case hearing, ordering his appearance before the court tomorrow (Friday). The court granted an exemption to the former premier after his counsel Gohar Ali Khan told Additional District and Sessions Judge Humayun Dilawar that his client was due to appear before the Lahore High Court and requested the court to fix any date for hearing after July 10. Despite the request for extended exemption, the court granted PTI chief Imran Khan a day-long exemption while instructing his counsel to ensure the former prime minister’s presence in court the following day. The sessions court took up the case Thursday a couple of days after the Islamabad High Chief Justice Aamer Farooq overturned the ruling of the local court against Imran’s challenge to the maintainability of the Toshakhana case and remanded the case back to the trial court to re-examine the matter within seven days. The IHC chief justice also asked the sessions court to keep in view eight legal questions he framed to decide maintainability of the reference, based on an ECP complaint for concealing state gifts. The questions included “whether the complaint has been filed on behalf of ECP by a duly authorised person”, “whether the decision of ECP dated 21.10.2022 is a valid authorisation to any officer of ECP to file a complaint”, “whether the question of authorisation is a question of fact and evidence and can be ratified subsequently during course of proceedings.” The other questions framed for the trial court judge are related to technicalities. In his verdict, the IHC chief justice had observed that the trial court judge did not address these questions and dealt with this case in a “very cursory and shoddy manner”.