It is too simple to state that. The Dutch government cannot extradite him at this moment in time. This is because this was a ruling in a "kort geding" (preliminary relief proceedings) which is a preliminary court case which normally is followed by a more extensive court case about the extradition question.
The court, in a previous court case ordered the Dutch government to investigate the circumstances of the original arrest which lead to the torture of Khan.
This court case has been going on for years, it went all the way to our version of the Supreme Court. And as said it all boils down to the international treaty (of which the Netherlands is a participant) that forbids governments from extraditing suspects if it can be suspected that the country who asks for the extradition was involved in the torture of the suspect.
All in all a very difficult case. At first the court ruled in favor of the government but on appeal the court decided that, in part due to the known involvement of the CIA with the ISI, there are too many unanswered/un-investigated questions left for them to decide to approve the extradition. As said, this is in no means final. Extradition is still a possibility.
This is part of the court ruling (translated):
The circumstances mentioned in the letter from October 15 2014, that the Pakistani government had their own reasons to arrest the plaintiff, does not give the court reason to change it's opinion. The only thing that is different from the previous court proceeding is that this letter states that the plaintiff was also suspected of crimes on Pakistani soil, but this does not change the fact that the Pakistani government did not want to proceed with criminal proceedings against the plaintiff and instead extradited him to the Netherlands. This letter does not change the previous ruling from the court that this could indicate that it was the US all along, and not Pakistan, who asked/had grounds for his arrest in the first place. The court also notes that it has not been given a sufficient explanation as to why, within three days of his arrest, the US asked for extradition of the plaintiff and that the US petitioned the Netherlands for extradition of the plaintiff three months before the suspect was even transferred to the Netherlands. The fact that his extradition was asked so quickly after his Pakistani arrest and the fact that his extradition request precedes his actual transfer to the Netherlands by three months, has not convinced the court that the Dutch government has done a sufficient investigation, as mandated by this court, into the circumstances of the plaintiffs arrest in Pakistan.
3.7.
Concluding, based on the previous (all of the previous, not just the part I have just translated for you) is that the court is of the opinion, that the uncertainty as to whether or not there was a possible involvement of the US in the torture of the plaintiff still remains. This means that the extradition of the plaintiff to the US is still deemed unlawful. Now that the Government, at the hearing has indicated that it does not think that the question whether or not the CIA was involved has any relevance and that the state has not offered to ask further questions about this to the US government, and there has been no indication or evidence that the US government by their own volition has offered further information regarding the arrest, means that this court sees no reason to give the State the opportunity to further investigate this before the court gives it's ruling. The primarily requested ban on extradition, made by the plaintiff is here by awarded.