ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) lawyer Mashal Azam on Thursday challenged the Islamabad High Court (IHC) judgement dated 24.03.2025 before the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court.
She sought directions to allow her to attend the proceedings of jail trial of PTI founder Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi.
She contended that the judgment of the IHC is against the law and facts available on file. The IHC judgment is a result of misreading and non-reading of the facts and available record. The High Court has passed the judgment in a cursory manner without going into the details of the matter.
Mashal Azam stated that the High Court has failed to consider the law laid down by the Supreme Court and passed the impugned judgment without applying judicial mind and without showing sufficient cause. The IHC while deciding the Crl. Org. Petition, has not considered this fact that as it is provided by Article 204 of Constitution.
She argued that the purpose of proceeding for contempt of court is not the protection of a judge, but in fact, it is for the protection of public at large, whose rights and interests would obviously be effected, if by any act or omission of any party, the authority of a judge is lowered and the confidence of the people in the administration of justice is diminished.
The petitioner engaged as a legal counsel by her clients, Imran Ahmed Khan Niazi and Bushra Bibi, in their previous and ongoing cases related to Toshakhana conducted by Accountability Court as well as cases registered at Police Station R.A. Bazar, Rawalpindi related to 9th May 2023 incidents and the trials of these accused persons are being regularly conducted in the Camp Court situated at Adiala Jail. As part of her professional obligations, she has been attending these court proceedings regularly.
That on 18.01.2025, cases pertaining to Anti-Terrorism were scheduled for hearing as jail trials, and the Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) is to conduct the proceedings. The petitioner, in compliance of her duties arrived at Adiala Jail to attend the court proceedings. However, the jail authorities did not allow her entry into the premises and stopped her at the outer gate of the jail.
She mentioned that the IHC on a writ petition of another lawyer on 06.09.2024, directed the jail authorities to allow the counsels of the accused, whose vakalatnamas have been duly signed and filed in the subject cases, to attend the proceedings.
Furthermore, the IHC also appointed commissioners to address any grievances arising in that regard. Despite of the clear directions, the jail authorities repeatedly obstructed the access of petitioner to the court proceedings, adding feeling aggrieved she filed Crl. Org. Petition, which was disposed of by IHC vide impugned order dated 24.03.2025.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Comments
Comments are closed for this article.