The legal battles of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf worsened on Friday when an accountability court found its party founder Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi guilty of corruption in the £190 million Al Qadir Trust case.

Khan has been behind bars for more than a year. His party leaders claim cases against him are “politically motivated,” however, the ministers have rejected such claims.

The former prime minister “laughed” in reaction to the judgement, PTI Chairman Gohar Ali Khan told reporters.

“Today’s decision has tarnished the credibility of the judiciary,” Khan told reporters inside Adiala Jail where the hearing was held.

Below are the key points of the verdict and the 148-page written order of the verdict.

Accountability Court in Islamabad Judge Nasir Javed Rana announced the judgement.

“The accused Bushra Imran is hereby held guilty for commission of offence of aiding, assisting, and abetting etc as defined u/s 9(a)(xii) of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999. Therefore, she is hereby convicted,” it said.

Section 9 of the NAO pertains to the case of a public office holder, or any other person, who has committed or to have committed the offence of corruption and corrupt practices.

“If he aids, assists, abets, attempts or acts in conspiracy with a person or a holder of public office accused of an offence as provided in clauses (i) to (xi).]; and,” states its sub-section 9(a)(xii).

According to the order, the former first lady’s role was “only to the extent of aiding and abetting” the offences of corruption and corrupt practices, which is considered to be a mitigating circumstance.

Bibi was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years and a fine amounting to Rs500,000. The court warned that she would be sentenced to jail further three months if she failed to pay the amount of fine.

Both the suspects were sentenced under Section 10-A (Punishment for Corruption and Corrupt Practices) of the NAB Ordinance 1999.

“A person who commits the offence of corruption and corrupt practices shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to 14 years, or with fine, or with both, and such of the assets and property of such person which is found to be disproportionate to the known sources of his income or which is acquired by money obtained through corruption and corrupt practices whether in his name or in the name of any of his dependents, or benamidars shall be liable to be forfeited to the appropriate Government,” states Section 10-A (Punishment for Corruption and Corrupt Practices) of the NAB Ordinance 1999.

Testimony and evidence

It added that the testimony of the prosecution witnesses “could not be discredited by the defence side.”

According to the court order, the prosecution case “mainly hinges” upon the documentary evidence which is proved “patiently.” In the view of the matter, it said that it could be concluded that the prosecution has proved it case against both the accused through the production of “cogent, credible, coherent, irrebuttable, reliable and confidence inspiring evidence.”

It said: “There might be certain minor discrepancies and contradictions in the prosecution evidence which are but natural in such like cases of white collar crimes.”

The point number 131 of the order stated that the defence “failed to create” any reasonable dent or doubt fatal for the prosecution case despite “flexible” opportunities. “Even the documents got exhibited in the defence are of hardly any value for it.”

The court dismissed both suspect’s applications.

On January 17, the court held Khan “guilty for commission of offence of corruption and corrupt practices” and declared convicted.

The court found him guilty under sections of 9(a)(ii)(iv)(vi) of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999.

“A holder of a public office, or any other person, is said to commit or to have committed the offence of corruption and corrupt practices,” says 9(a) of the NAO.

Also, read this

Jailed former PM Khan ‘sharply reacts’ to £190m case verdict

Khan’s lawyer Faisal Chaudhry says will challenge £190m case verdict

What will be course of PTI negotiations with government after Khan, his wife conviction?

“if he accepts or obtains or offers any valuable thing without consideration, or for a consideration which he knows to be inadequate, from any person whom he knows to have been, or likely to be, concerned in any proceeding or business transacted or about to be transacted by him, or having any connection with his official functions or 2 [from] any person whom he knows to be interested in or related to the person so concerned; or,” says 9(a)(ii) of the NAO.

“if he by corrupt, dishonest, or illegal means, obtains or seeks to obtain for himself, or for his spouse 3* or dependents or any other person, any property, valuable thing, or pecuniary advantage; or,” says 9(a)(iv) of the NAO.

“2 [if he misuses his authority so as to gain any benefit or favour for himself or any other person, or 3 [renders or attempts to render] 4 [or willfully fails to exercise his authority to prevent the grant, or rendition of any undue benefit or favour which he could have prevented by exercising his authority],” says 9(a)(vi) of the NAO.

The court found Khan guilty of corruption, leading to a sentence of 14 years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs1 million.

Should the founder fail to pay the fine, an additional six months of imprisonment would be imposed.

“Property of the sham trust ‘the Al-Qadir University Project Trust’ is hereby forfeited to the Federal Government,” it said.

Both the convicts shall also face the consequences under Section 15 (Disqualification to contest elections1 [or to hold public office) of the NAO, it said.