Islamabad district and sessions court Judge Muhammad Afzal Majoka has emphasised that the verdict in Imran Khan-Bushra Bibi Nikkah Iddat case will be announced by July 12. The district and sessions court on Wednesday adjourned the hearing on appeals against the conviction of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf founder Imran Khan and his wife, Bushra Bibi in the Nikkah Iddat case until July 8. Earlier, an Islamabad court on June 27 had rejected pleas seeking the suspension of sentences handed down to PTI founding chairman Imran and his wife Bushra Bibi in the iddat (mandatory waiting period for Muslim women between two marriages) case. The additional district and sessions Judge Muhammad Afzal Majoka presided over the hearing. PTI’s counsel Salman Akram Raja. Yesterday, Raja had partially argued against the rejection of the suspension of the sentence. At the outset of the hearing, Advocate Raja commenced his arguments as he cited Section 7 of the Muslim Family Law. To which Judge Majoka asked, “Are you saying that Section 7 does not apply in this case?” Raja referenced various judicial decisions on Muslim law, arguing that family law is part of personal law and falls under the jurisdiction of the Shariat Court. He contended that, according to the previous rulings by the country’s apex court, a divorce becomes effective even if the Union Council procedure is not completed. The court noted that Section 7 cannot be used to exert pressure. Judge Majoka observed that in one case, a woman claimed maintenance despite the lack of a Section 7 notice, and the court granted her the right to maintenance. Raja argued that a woman could marry without a Union Council certificate and that invalidating thousands of marriages annually would create numerous inheritance issues. He cited the Allahd dad case, where the court ruled that the Iddat (waiting period) restarts upon the husband’s death. Various interpretations of the Iddat period were discussed, including the acceptance of 39 days and three menstrual cycles. Judge Majoka questioned whether the trial court should have accepted these references or sought evidence. Raja responded that if the references were not accepted, the court should have requested evidence. He further argued that the trial court overlooked the Shariat appellate bench of the SC and that the focus should be on the legitimacy of the Nikkah ceremony, not the accusation of adultery. Raja concluded his arguments saying everything in this case was dependent on Latif’s testimony. The statements of all witnesses, including Khawar Maneka and Latif, are based on lies, he alleged. He stated that the woman’s testimony should be given importance. PTI’s Raja completed his arguments, while Barrister Salman Safdar was summoned to provide counterarguments. Safdar requested that his arguments be scheduled for Monday as he was unavailable the next day. He assured the court that he would conclude his arguments within two hours. Judge Majoka reiterated that the court must deliver its decision by July 12. The complainant Khawar Maneka’s counsel, Zahid Asif, expressed interest in hearing Safdar’s arguments. The court adjourned the case until July 8.