Imran Khan could be released from prison on health grounds after 3 years, says his family
In a Nutshell:
- Sources close to Khan’s family and Pakistan’s military establishment said discussions over a possible release on health grounds have taken place, with former PM Nawaz Sharif’s 2019 medical release seen as a similar precedent.
- Khan’s family has raised concerns about his health after months of restricted contact with him.
- In February 2026, Punjab’s government itself withdrew three petitions seeking to cancel Khan’s bail, rather than the court forcing that outcome.
- In December 2025, a United Nations’ (UN) special rapporteur said that Imran Khan is being held in inhumane conditions and called on Pakistani authorities to comply with international standards.
- A Supreme Court-appointed amicus curiae (impartial adviser to a court of law in particular case) visited Khan in jail in February 2026 and reported significant loss of sight in one eye, feeding a formal petition to suspend his 17-year sentence on health grounds.
- There is evidence judges are growing more skeptical of the prosecution’s evidence rather than automatically upholding it.
- This marks a shift from earlier years (2023-2024), when acquittals in one case (like the unlawful marriage charge) were repeatedly offset by fresh arrests or revoked bail in others, keeping him detained regardless of individual wins.
Why it matters
Imran Khan remains imprisoned in Adiala Jail despite winning bail in dozens of peripheral cases, because his two major convictions — the 14-year Al-Qadir Trust sentence and a newer 17-year state-gifts (Toshakhana) sentence handed down in December 2025 — are still on appeal. Courts have granted him bail or anticipatory bail in numerous smaller cases (six in March 2026, eight tied to the May 9, 2023 riots), but none of these releases apply while the core corruption convictions stand.
What we think
The core prosecutorial track on his two major convictions has, if anything, hardened. The December 2025 gifts-case verdict added a fresh 17-year sentence on top of the existing 14-year one, rather than easing his position. This dual pattern , leniency on peripheral cases, firmness on the core convictions suggests the judiciary is willing to correct evidentiary overreach while the political establishment keeps the decisive levers (the two major sentences) firmly in place, meaning any real release still hinges more on political negotiation than judicial momentum.
