ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Monday adjourned the hearing of sentence suspension petitions filed by human rights lawyers Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir and Hadi Ali Chattha in the controversial social media posts case as the Supreme Court directive to decide the pleas by May 26 remained unfulfilled.

The Supreme Court directive was issued on May 12, more than three months after the husband-wife duo were sentenced in the case. They had subsequently filed petitions against their conviction in early February.

IHC’s Justice Muhammad Azam Khan took up those pleas today, but the hearing was adjourned due to the absence of two of the three special prosecution team members.

The prosecutor who attended the hearing informed the court that one of his team members was travelling from Lahore while another was engaged in proceedings before the IHC chief justice.

At that, Justice Khan remarked that he was specifically at the court for the hearing of Imaan’s and Hadi’s pleas despite being nominated for mediation training. Addressing the prosecutor, he asked whether the prosecution was aware of the Supreme Court’s directions in the case.

Regarding that, one of the counsels for the petitioners, Advocate Riasat Ali Azad,noted that the deadline set by the Supreme Court had already expired.

Justice Khan observed that the petitions had been filed in light of the Supreme Court’s order, which required the IHC to decide the sentence suspension applications within two weeks from May 12.

Another counsel for the petitioners, Faisal Siddiqui, argued that one of the prosecutors should appear before the court after completing his commitments in the IHC CJ’s court.

Justice Khan noted that he had already heard cases in the morning and had even missed his mediation training session scheduled for 8:30am to attend the proceedings of of Imaan’s and Hadi’s pleas.

The prosecutor requested the court to adjourn the hearing till Thursday or next Monday. After consulting the petitioners’ counsels regarding their availability, Justice Khan fixed the hearing for Thursday, June 4.

At that, Siddiqui requested that the prosecution be restrained from seeking any further adjournments. In response, Justice Khan remarked that repeated reminders were unnecessary as all parties were bound to comply with the Supreme Court order.

The case

Imaan and Hadi have been in jail since their arrest in January in a case registered against the two for protesting outside the IHC and allegedly manhandling the IHC Bar Association (IHCBA) president.

While the arrest prompted criticism by rights bodies, politicians, and journalists, who stressed the couple’s right to a fair trial, a sessions court sentenced them to 17 years in prison in the social media posts case just a day after the development.

The controversy at the centre of the case stems from a complaint filed on August 12, 2025, by the NCCIA Islamabad assistant director (investigating officer) before the Cybercrime Reporting Centre, FIA, under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 (Peca).

The complaint accused Imaan of disseminating and “propagating narratives that align with hostile terrorist groups and proscribed organisations”, while her husband was implicated for reposting some of her posts.

In January, the sessions court sentenced the duo to 10 years’ imprisonment under Section 10 (cyber terrorism), five years’ imprisonment under Section 9 (glorification of an offence) and two years’ imprisonment under Section 26-A (false and fake information) of Peca.

Subsequently, they challenged their conviction by filing separate criminal appeals in the IHC on February 7.

On April 30, the duo had moved another appeal in the SC, seeking an early hearing of their pleas against their conviction.

Moved under Article 185(3) of the Constitution, the application requested the grant of leave to appeal against the Feb 19 IHC order. Through that order, the IHC had admitted the appeal against the trial court’s Jan 24 decision of handing down a 17-year sentence to the couple.

And while it had issued notices to the respondents on the application for the suspension of sentence, it had not suspended the sentence.

The petition contended that the appeals be accepted and the sentence awarded to the petitioners through the impugned trial court’s judgement be suspended till the disposal of the criminal appeal pending before the IHC.

On May 12, the Supreme Court asked the IHC to decide within two weeks the pleas seeking the suspension of their sentences.

Until the IHC decides upon the petitions, the matter will remain pending before the apex court, a three-judge SC bench, consisting of Justice Shahid Waheed, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Shafi Siddiqui, observed.

Then, on May 20, the IHC issued notices to officials of the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) on applications requesting an expedited hearing of the sentence suspension petitions.

It was a day after Justice Khan raised objections over the non-submission of certified copies of the Supreme Court order and directed the defence counsel to submit the certified order through the court office in accordance with the prescribed procedure.

Following the submission of the certified copy, the case was fixed for June 1. But, the hearing again had to be adjourned today due to the prosectors’ absence.