Current Final

Tag: IHC

  • PTI distances itself from petition seeking conjugal rights for jailed Imran Khan, wife

    PTI distances itself from petition seeking conjugal rights for jailed Imran Khan, wife

    Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) has condemned and dissociated itself from a petition for conjugal rights recently filed in the Islamabad High Court (IHC) in the name of incarcerated former premier Imran Khan and his spouse Bushra Bibi.

    “PTI, with deep regret and grave concern, clarifies that the petition filed in the Islamabad High Court under the names of former Prime Minister Imran Khan and his respected wife, Bushra Bibi, regarding ‘Conjugal Rights’ has no connection whatsoever with Imran Khan, Bushra Bibi, their family, PTI, or their legal team,” said the PTI central information department in a statement issued on Friday.

    The statement further noted that the petition was filed by an individual named Shahid Yaqoob, who has no association with Imran Khan, his family, or any member of PTI. 

    In the statement, PTI declared the act “utterly deplorable, obscene, and vile,” adding that the party considers it not only morally unacceptable but also lacking any political or legal basis.

    “PTI strongly condemns such activities and requests the public and media not to associate any unverified claims in this matter with PTI or its leadership.”

    The statement concluded by clarifying that the defence of the rights and dignity of Imran Khan and his wife is being undertaken by PTI and their legal team, and “this shameful and condemnable act by an unrelated party is disgraceful”.

    The petition was filed on Friday under Article 199 of the Constitution by Yaqoob, a resident of Islamabad and a supporter of Khan, in the IHC, seeking permission for the founder of PTI and Bushra Bibi to exercise their conjugal rights while confined in Adiala Jail, Rawalpindi.

    In the petition, Yaqoob argued that denying conjugal rights violates constitutional protections, international conventions, and previous court rulings. The plea referred to the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the European Convention on Human Rights, all of which safeguard the right to family life.

    The petitioner also cited a 2010 notification issued by the Sindh Home Department, following Supreme Court directions, which allowed convicted prisoners to have conjugal visits every three months.

    It further relied on the Federal Shariat Court’s landmark judgement that recognised conjugal rights for prisoners as a fundamental entitlement and requested the IHC to order the implementation of SC and Federal Shariat Court directives.

  • Justice Saman Imtiaz stripped of powers after taking up Imaan Mazari’s harassment case against CJ

    Justice Saman Imtiaz stripped of powers after taking up Imaan Mazari’s harassment case against CJ

    The administration of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has stripped Justice Saman Rafat Imtiaz of her powers to entertain harassment complaints after she took cognisance of one filed by lawyer and human rights activist Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir against Chief Justice (CJ) Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar.

    Last week, lawyer Mazari and CJ Dogar had a heated exchange during the hearing of a plea filed on behalf of Baloch Yakjehti Committee (BYC) leader Dr Mahrang Baloch. CJ Dogar had warned lawyer Mazari of contempt and was reported to have passed warning remarks along the lines of “getting hold of her”.

    Lawyer Mazari on Monday approached the IHC’s anti-harassment committee and also sent a reference against CJ Dogar to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC).

    In response to her complaint, Justice Imtiaz, being the “competent authority”, not only entertained the complaint but also established an inquiry committee in consultation with her fellow judges.

    A circular from her office said that under the Protection Against Harassment of Women at the Workplace Act 2010, an inquiry committee, comprising Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir and Justice Imtiaz, had been formed to conduct probe the matter. 

    However, a notification issued by the IHC registrar’s office later, Justice Inaam Amin Minhas was appointed as the new head of the Women’s Harassment Committee.

    Reports citing the court record claimed that a similar committee was already formed in 2019, comprising the member inspection team (MIT), deputy and assistant registrars under the said act, to probe allegations of harassment. 

    A senior official of the IHC was quoted as saying that the act did not apply to judges as they could only be charged under Article 209 of the Constitution.

    Another reason for de-notifying Justice Imtiaz was that, as the competent authority, she herself could not serve on the inquiry committee.

  • Justice Ejaz’s commission to probe blasphemy allegations suspended

    Justice Ejaz’s commission to probe blasphemy allegations suspended

    A division bench of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday suspended a single-member bench’s order to the federal government to constitute a commission to investigate blasphemy allegations.

    Last week, widespread concerns over alleged entrapment, custodial deaths, and grave investigative lapses, prompted the IHC to give the government 30 days to establish a commission to probe misuse of the blasphemy law, giving the order during the hearing of a case seeking such a commission’s formation. 

    BEWARE: Group ‘honey-trapping’ youngsters in blasphemy on social media

    IHC Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan ordered the commission to complete its work within four months while allowing the possibility for an extension.

    A lawyer from the Legal Commission on Blasphemy Pakistan, Rao Abdur Rahim, and others had filed an intra-court appeal against Justice Ejaz’s verdict. The case was heard on Thursday by Justices Khadim Hussain Soomro and Azam Khan.

    Advocates Kamran Murtaza, Adil Aziz Qazi, and others appeared before the court on behalf of Rahim. When Justice Soomro asked how petitioners were directly affected by the order, Murtaza argued that they had not been given a full hearing. 

    “There are four hundred cases and some cases are beyond the jurisdiction of this court,” Murtaza said. “Can a commission be formed in this case,” he questioned.

    The bench subsequently suspended Justice Ejaz’s order from last week and issued notices to the parties.

    During last week’s hearing, Justice Ejaz expressed concern over the disappearance of a woman named Komal Ismail, the elusive central figure linked to the blasphemy-related case.

    Ismail had been identified as ‘Imaan’, a shadowy figure who was allegedly involved in “trapping” a number of those accused of blasphemy.

    Earlier this month, over her failure to appear before the court, the judge had ordered her CNIC to be blocked.

    The IHC also expressed concern over the Federal Investigation Agency’s (FIA) failure to conduct proper forensic analysis and procedural irregularities, including private arrests, unverified digital evidence, and the same Facebook IDs being reused in multiple FIRs.

    Most alarming were the reports of four custodial deaths of blasphemy suspects, with one video showing signs of torture, and no judicial or administrative inquiry conducted in these cases.

    Stressing that the issue was of “definite public interest,” the court had justified the formation of a commission as necessary to ensure transparency, accountability, and the protection of fundamental rights.

  • Imran Khan likely to be presented at Islamabad High Court today

    Imran Khan likely to be presented at Islamabad High Court today

    An important development has taken place in the case regarding Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader and former Special Assistant to the KP Chief Minister, Mashal Yousafzai, regarding her alleged obstruction of a meeting with former premier Imran Khan at Adiala Jail, Rawalpindi.

    As per details, the Islamabad High Court summoned the Superintendent of Adiala Jail at noon on Friday (today). Justice Sardar Ijaz Ishaq Khan, while issuing the order, directed the Jail Superintendent to meet the PTI founder in jail to confirm whether Yousafzai is his legal counsel, adding that the Superintendent must then report back to the court.

    He ordered, “If the court is not satisfied with the statement of the Jail Superintendent, then produce Imran Khan in court at 3 pm.” He further instructed the Inspector General (IG) of Islamabad to make arrangements for Imran Khan’s court appearance.

    Meanwhile, PTI leaders have written to the jail superintendent over being denied permission to meet Imran Khan, calling it contempt of court, according to media reports.

    This comes as, on Thursday, Opposition Leader in the National Assembly Omar Ayub Khan, Sunni Ittehad Council Chief Sahibzada Hamid Raza, Opposition Leader in the Senate Shibli Faraz, Senator Allama Raja Nasir Abbas, former MNA Colonel (retd) Amirullah Marwat, PTI Khyber Pakhtunkhwa President Junaid Akbar, and Advocate Khalid Yousaf Chaudhry arrived at Adiala Jail to meet Imran Khan but were denied permission.

    In the request submitted, former ruling party leaders stated that the authorities were violating the orders of the IHC, which amounted to contempt of court. “We were present at Gate No. 5 since 2 PM. The founder has repeatedly requested the meeting, and the list of visitors was also submitted to the jail authorities as per SOPs, but despite that, we were not allowed to meet him,” the letter stated.

    The letter further claimed that the authorities were violating Khan’s fundamental rights by preventing the meeting.

    It was signed by Omar Ayub Khan, Shibli Faraz, Sahibzada Hamid Raza, Junaid Akbar, and Allama Raja Nasir Abbas, while the text was written by PTI founder’s lawyer, Khalid Yousaf Chaudhry.

    The letter also reaffirmed that the Islamabad High Court had been assured multiple times that PTI leaders would be allowed to meet the party founder.

  • Islamabad Court orders Adiala authorities to present Imran Khan in court today

    Islamabad Court orders Adiala authorities to present Imran Khan in court today

    The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has directed the Adiala Jail Rawalpindi authorities to present the founder of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), Imran Khan, before the court at 3 PM today.

    “Bring the PTI founder; he will have a meeting with his lawyers,” IHC stated during the hearing of a contempt of court case against the Adiala Jail Rawalpindi Superindentent for not allowing lawyers to meet Khan in jail.

    Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan directed the superintendent to record reasons for every time he failed to ensure Imran Khan’s presence before the court.

    “The court does not accept the security threats […] the lawyers were not allowed to meet. This is contempt of the court,” Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq remarked.

    Citing the imposition of a ban on lawyers meeting with Khan, the State Council informed the court that the Punjab government had imposed the ban on meeting in Adiala jail amidst security concerns.

    “Is there a ban on lawyers meeting him? If the Punjab government has prohibited the meeting of the lawyers, it would have committed contempt of court; whoever issued this notification has also committed contempt of court,” the court responded to the state council’s argument on security concerns, and directed the authorities to present the PTI founder in court.

    However, later in the day, it was reported that Adiala Jail authorities had arranged for a meeting between Imran Khan and lawyers Salman Akram Raja, Faisal Fareed Chaudhary and Shoaib Shaheen.

    Security concerns were cited by jail authorities for being unable to present the PTI founder in court instead. Imran’s lawyers have also been informed about the development, reports said.

  • ‘Defence par baat karne se pehle ISPR clearance kyun zaroori hai?’; High Court questions army control on defence analysis

    ‘Defence par baat karne se pehle ISPR clearance kyun zaroori hai?’; High Court questions army control on defence analysis

    The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has ordered the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) to present the original noting file upon which the eligibility of a defence analyst is processed and recommended.

    Hearing a petition filed by Colonel (retd) Inamul Rahim Advocate, who challenged PEMRA’s April 4, 2019 notification, Justice Babar Sattar questioned the legal standing of Inter Service Public Relations (ISPR) over their exclusive right to determine which defence analyst can appear on Pakistan TV.

    The April 4, 2019, notification stated that retired army officers could analyse defence matters on television news and current affairs programmes after obtaining ISPR clearance.

    The Islamabad court asked PEMRA’s counsel what the military media wing has to do with the pre-clearance of defence analysts with Pakistan’s sovereignty and how PEMRA can impose a prior restraint on speech.

    Citing section 20 of the PEMRA ordinance, the Counsel said that the provision assures responsibility of TV channels to protect national security, integrity and sovereignty.


    However, the case was adjourned until November 20.

  • Government clarifies no military trial for Imran Khan

    Government clarifies no military trial for Imran Khan

    The federal government clarified to the Islamabad High Court (IHC) that the possibility of a military trial for founder of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), Imran Khan, is not under consideration.

    Additional Attorney General (AAG) Barrister Munawar Iqbal Duggal remarked before the IHC that the defence ministry has not yet provided any information regarding former Prime Minister Imran Khan’s military trial.

    However, the AAG Duggal cleared to the IHC bench headed by Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb that Khan’s military trial would be per the law if the military court tried him.

    Law official for Ministry of Defence, Brigadier Falak Naz remarked that civilian trials by the military court are possible for certain offences under Section 2(1) (d) of the Pakistan Army Act.

    Earlier, ex-PM Khan filed a petition against his possible military trial in connection with the May 9 violent protest cases, upon which IHC directed the incumbent government to submit its answer by September 24.

  • Khan, Bushra Bibi request IHC to transfer back Iddat case to Judge Shahrukh Arjumand

    Khan, Bushra Bibi request IHC to transfer back Iddat case to Judge Shahrukh Arjumand

    Incarcerated former Prime Minister Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi have requested the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday to transfer the Iddat Nikkah case back to Islamabad district and session court judge Shahrukh Arjumand, The Express Tribune reported.

    IHC judge Miangul Hasan Aurangzeb heard the petition, eliminated objections raised by the registrar’s office on the plea, and sent notices to Bushra Bibi’s former husband, Khawar Maneka, in the case.   

    During the hearing, Khan’s counsel, Salman Safdar, requested the court to transfer the case back to judge Shahrukh Arjumand or IHC to hear the plea itself.

  • IHC declares Ahmad Farhad’s arrest illegal

    IHC declares Ahmad Farhad’s arrest illegal

    Islamabad High Court (IHC) has declared Kashmiri poet and activist Ahmad Farhad’s arrest to be illegal on Monday, ARY News reported.
    IHC said in a written order that Ahamad Farhad had been forcefully abducted from his residence in Islamabad, while security institutions failed to recover him.

    The court ordered that Ahmad Farhad should record his statement before the Lohi Bher magistrate after returning home.

    The court also ordered IHC registrar to combine all the cases of forced disappearance and submit them to the IHC’s Chief Justice.

  • No ban on reporting, court assures journalists

    No ban on reporting, court assures journalists

    Islamabad High Court (IHC) has clarified that court reporting is not banned and assured journalists that they can do it but must avoid “irresponsible reporting.”

    The IHC, in a significant move, announced its stance during a hearing of a case challenging the petition of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority’s (Pemra) ban on broadcasting court proceedings on news channels.

    IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq said in a statement that media organizations are free to cover court proceedings but should avoid irresponsible reporting.

    Pemra submitted its reply during the hearing.

    Meanwhile, the court asked additional attorney general about the potential involvement of federal government in the matter. “This is Pemra’s matter, not the federal government’s,” he responded.

    Barrister Umer Ijaz Gilani, one of the petitioner’s counsel, stated that Pemra’s law does not restrict reporting on pending cases.


    After that, IHC adjourned the hearing till June 11.