ISLAMABAD: Incarcerated human rights lawyer Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir and her husband, Hadi Chattha, on Monday approached the Supreme Court, challenging the Islamabad High Court’s (IHC) Oct 19 order refusing to suspend their trial before an anti-terrorism court (ATC) in a security breach case.
The case concerns the alleged disruption of an international cricket team’s security route and incitement to public unrest. The couple, accused of removing barriers along the route, was indicted on Oct 7.
The IHC had heard their appeals last week against an Oct 10 ATC order dismissing petitions challenging the framing of charges and the inclusion of terrorism-related provisions. The high court issued notices and said it would decide how to proceed after receiving responses from the parties.
Through senior counsel Faisal Siddiqui, the couple filed separate, nearly identical petitions before the SC, alleging that the trial court had proceeded with unprecedented haste by recording the examination-in-chief of six prosecution witnesses on Oct 10 and 14. They also challenged the decision to shift proceedings to jail, where the trial court had appointed state counsel.
The petitioner questioned the legality of recording evidence without formally dispensing with the accused’s personal attendance or initiating proceedings under Section 540-A of the CrPC. The petitions argued that the ATC orders on Oct 10 and 14 noted that counsel had left the rostrum and the accused had moved away from the video link, yet the court proceeded with recording their evidence on both dates. The couple maintained that their absence, along with that of their counsel, was a protest and had been recorded as such. They argued that this did not constitute a waiver of their right to be present during evidence recording.
The petitions urged the SC to set aside the IHC order, arguing that the ongoing proceedings involved serious violations of due process and fair-trial protections.
IHC hears plea against jail trial
Meanwhile, the IHC heard arguments on a petition filed by the couple challenging their trial at Adiala jail and the appointment of a state counsel.
A division bench comprising Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas and Justice Shahrukh Arjumand heard the case, with advocates Riasat Ali Azad and Zainab Janjua representing the petitioners.
During the proceedings, Advocate Azad said the decision to conduct the trial inside the jail had been challenged because the accused were not heard before the arrangement was approved.
Justice Minhas questioned the legal basis of the challenge, asking who had the authority to determine the trial venue and whether an accused could dictate where proceedings should take place.
Mr Azad described the arrangement as a “jail court”, arguing that access to proceedings was restricted. He said the summary for holding the trial inside the jail had been initiated by an Islamabad superintendent of police and approved by the chief commissioner. However, he maintained that the police officer lacked the authority to initiate the process, which he argued fell within the federal government’s jurisdiction.
After hearing the arguments, the judge said the court would examine the matter. The bench did not announce a decision on the request.
Published in Dawn, October 27th, 2026
