The Islamabad High Court (IHC) declared the Tyrian White case against former premier Imran Khan inadmissible on Tuesday, observing that the case had already been heard and decided upon. A larger bench headed by Justice Tariq Mahmood Jahangiri including Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir and Justice Saman Riffat heard the case, seeking the PTI founder’s disqualification on the grounds that he did not declare his ‘daughter’ in his nomination papers. Lawyer Hamid Ali Shah appeared before the court on behalf of petitioner Mohammad Sajid. He informed that PTI counsel Salman Akram Raja had sought an adjournment in the matter. At this point PTI lawyer Naeem Haider Panjotha intervened, stating that the verdict in this case was announced on May 10, last year, and was subsequently uploaded on the court’s website. He added that this case has also been cited by the six IHC judges in their letter written to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) regarding interference of spy agencies in judicial matters. Justice Jahangiri observed that two of the three judges hearing the case declared the application inadmissible. “What will be the effect after the decision of two judges?” he inquired. The petitioner’s counsel informed the court that the high court’s chief justice did not sign the order. The judge again asked Hamid about the possible effect of an order when two judges had signed it. Hamid then sought two to three weeks’ time to prepare his arguments. However, the judge asked how could the court give a date for a hearing in a case that has already been rejected. Hamid stated that he required some time to seek judicial assistance. Despite Hamid’s request, the court declared the case against the former premier ‘inadmissible’. As the IHC took up the case again after a year, the PTI claimed it was an “unjust” attempt to keep Imran imprisoned. A spokesperson for the party, in a strongly-worded statement, criticized the move as a “desperate and baseless” effort by Imran’s opponents, who had already faced setbacks in other legal battles, including the Toshakhana, cipher, and Al-Qadir Trust cases, to keep him behind bars. He accused the IHC chief justice of bias, claiming that his decision to form a new bench to hear the Tyrian case, despite an “existing” verdict by a three-judge bench, demonstrated partiality against the PTI founding chairman. The spokesperson denounced the ongoing filing of what he described as “bogus cases” including the Tyrian and Iddat ones against Imran. Last year, in a strange development, the opinion of two of the three IHC judges who heard a petition seeking former prime minister Imran Khan’s disqualification for hiding his alleged daughter was uploaded on the court’s website only to be subsequently removed. A three-judge bench, led by IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq and comprising Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani and Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir, reserved its verdict on March 30, 2023. Imran in a reply submitted to the court, on February 1, 2023, in the case said that it was “not maintainable” on legal grounds. In his reply submitted through lawyer Salman Akram Raja, the PTI chief contended that the IHC while exercising constitutional jurisdiction could not examine any affidavit issued by him as he has already resigned as a member of the National Assembly. He maintained that the IHC could not proceed in this matter as he had already ceased to be a member of the parliament.