District election commissioner’s remark is documented in court records, according to Toshkhana.

ISLAMABAD: Imran Khan, the leader of the PTI, was accused of engaging in corrupt activities in a Toshakhana reference that was heard in court on Tuesday. The former prime minister has vigorously disputed these allegations and promised to fight them in court.

The District Election Commissioner (DEC), Waqas Malik, gave a statement in court that was recorded by the judges.

Later, Extra Sessions On December 8, 2022, Judge Zafar Iqbal postponed the hearing.

A trial court in Islamabad served the PTI leader with a notice a day before the Toshakhana reference trial was set to begin, as per the direction of the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP).

Following receipt of a copy of the reference directing the initiation of criminal proceedings against Khan by the court, the notice was delivered.

Depending on the circumstances, Khan may receive a harsh fine and a three-year prison term.

The PTI leader was declared to no longer be a member of the National Assembly by the ECP last month, who also disqualified the former prime minister in the Toshakana issue.

The PTI head was deemed to have engaged in corrupt behaviour in violation of Article 63(1), according to the ECP, and had produced a fraudulent affidavit (p).

The ECP order stated, “As a result of our aforementioned findings, facts on file, and taking into consideration the argument of learned counsel for parties herein, we are of the considered opinion that the Respondent has become disqualified under Article 63(1)(p) of the Constitution read with Sections 137,167, and 173 of the Elections Act, 2017, as a result of which he ceases to be a member of the National Assembly of Pakistan and his seat has accordingly become vacant.”

The Elections Commission of Pakistan (ECP) further stated in its ruling that Khan had made “false statements and erroneous declarations, hence he has also committed the offence of corrupt practises outlined under Sections 167 and 173 of the Elections Act, 2017.”

In addition, it stated that the offence was penalised in accordance with Section 174 of the Elections Act of 2017, and it ordered legal action and additional follow-up under Section 190(2) of the Elections Act.