Lawyer and rights activist Imaan Mazari and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, approached the Supreme Court on Monday to challenge an Islamabad High Court (IHC) order that affects their trial in a security breach case. Their appeal, filed through Advocate Faisal Siddiqui, asks the apex court to overturn the IHC’s October 19 decision, which rejected their request for interim relief.
The case was registered at Aabpara Police Station. It alleges that the couple posed a security risk by interfering in state affairs during a visit by an international cricket team in October 2024. The couple denies the allegations, and the anti-terrorism court (ATC) in Islamabad indicted them earlier this month, even though they had told the court they had not yet received copies of the case documents.
Couple says witnesses were not cross-examined
In their petition, the couple said the statements of two prosecution witnesses were recorded without giving the defence a chance to cross-examine them. They also argued that the high court had refused interim relief against the trial in its October 19 order. They have asked the Supreme Court to set that order aside and stop the trial court from moving forward.
Also read: ATC appoints state counsel for Imaan Mazari, Hadi Ali Chattha
Separately, a bench of the IHC comprising Justice Inaam Ameen Minhas and Justice Shahrukh Arjumand heard the couple’s challenge to the jail trial and to the appointment of a state counsel. Advocates Riasat Ali Azad and Zainab Janjua appeared for Mazari and Chattha.
High court questions authority behind jail trial
During the hearing, the defence questioned who had the power to start the jail trial. Their counsel argued that the accused should have been heard before any decision was taken to hold proceedings inside a prison. The lawyers also challenged the process that led to the proposal.
According to the counsel, the summary came from Islamabad’s senior superintendent of police and received final approval from the chief commissioner. They argued that such a process could only be initiated by the federal government. Justice Minhas asked about the concept of an open court and wanted to know who had the authority to decide where an accused person would be tried.
Advocate Azad told the bench that journalists and members of the public would not be able to attend proceedings held inside a jail. He said an application had been filed before the trial judge, arguing that no judicial order had yet been issued on the matter. He added that the trial judge had directed the defence to take the issue to the high court.
Janjua told the court that she had first appeared in the matter but later withdrew her vakalatnama, or power of attorney. She said that travelling to Adiala jail every day while keeping up her legal practice was not practical. Azad also argued that the offences were bailable and questioned the inclusion of a terrorism charge. He asked the court to grant relief and stop the trial court from delivering a final verdict.
Justice Minhas asked why the petitioners were seeking such relief, noting that they could also be acquitted. After hearing the defence, the court adjourned the hearing and said it would examine the matter.
Earlier arrests and court rulings in the couple’s cases
The couple has been in custody since their arrest on January 23, in a case registered over a protest outside the Islamabad High Court. A day later, a sessions court sentenced them to 17 years on multiple charges under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (Peca), in a case linked to controversial social media posts.
On September 17, after months of proceedings, the Supreme Court suspended their sentences in a case related to controversial tweets. It also granted them bail against surety bonds of Rs200,000 each, pending a final decision on the case before the Islamabad High Court. That relief did not last long. Hours later, Islamabad police arrested the couple again in another case and produced them before an anti-terrorism court.
According to the first information report (FIR), Mazari and her husband were accused of chanting anti-government slogans and blocking roads during a protest.
