ISLAMABAD: The Federal Constitutional Court of Pakistan (FCCP) dismissed Bushra Bibi’s appeal for sentence suspension on Wednesday. Her main appeal remains pending before the Islamabad High Court (IHC).
Rather than examine sentence suspension in parallel, the bench favoured an early decision on the main appeal. It expected the high court to give both sides a fair hearing and discourage unnecessary adjournments.
Chief Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan and Justice Ali Baqar Najafi issued the written order after hearing the case. Barrister Salman Safdar represented Bibi in the proceedings.
Bibi challenged the IHC’s April 30 order rejecting her request to suspend the sentence an accountability court imposed on January 17, 2025. That request sought relief pending a final decision on her appeal.
Safdar argued that the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) had repeatedly sought adjournments, delaying consideration of the suspension application. He maintained that the main appeal required substantial time because it involved an extensive record and complex legal questions.
Read: PTI Plans Court Challenge to KP Emergency and Governor’s Rule
Citing a precedent involving former prime minister Nawaz Sharif, Safdar argued that scheduling the main appeal did not automatically bar sentence suspension. He contended that the high court still had to examine the application on its merits.
In assessing the IHC order, the FCCP found that the high court declined suspension without examining the application’s merits. It cited the scheduling of the main appeal and counsel’s failure to provide the assistance needed to decide it.
The bench held that an extensive record requiring detailed arguments did not, by itself, justify intervention.
“We find no sufficient ground warranting interference with the impugned order at this stage,” the order read.
Separately, the court accepted Bibi’s explanation for filing the appeal 61 days late. Her imprisonment at Adiala Jail provided sufficient grounds to excuse the delay.
Bibi brought the appeal under Section 32-A of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999. Her original suspension application invoked Sections 426 and 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
For the main proceedings, the bench expected Safdar to fully assist the IHC. It placed an equal obligation on NAB to present its arguments without requesting unwarranted adjournments.
