The bench keeps the case pending for itself until the high court decides, the couple’s lawyer rejects passivity in appeals
Lawyer and human rights activist Imaan Mazari and her husband, lawyer Hadi Ali Chattha. PHOTO: EXPRESS
ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday directed the Islamabad High Court (IHC) to decide on stay-of-judgment petitions filed by lawyer Imaan Mazari and her husband Hadi Ali Chattha within two weeks, while the case is pending on its own until the high court makes a decision.
A three-member bench headed by Justice Shahid Waheed heard the case, where the couple’s lawyer, Faisal Siddiqi, informed the court that the IHC had only issued notices on the appeals and no further hearing on the appeal had taken place for over two months.
“There is no relief for us in the IHC,” Siddiqi told the bench, arguing that the court should decide on the plea for stay of sentence.
However, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan observed that no adverse order had been passed against the petitioners either. “There is no order against you from the high court,” he noted, adding that the IHC had not rejected the plea for stay of sentence.
Read: SC registrar raises objections to Imaan Mazari’s plea
The judge also questioned the legal parameters for suspending a sentence. “What are the parameters for suspending a sentence? When is a sentence suspended?” Justice Afghan asked and observed that if the Supreme Court had rejected the plea, the SC could have gone into the merits of the case.
Siddiqi retreated and questioned where the petitioners should turn in view of the absence of any relief from the IHC. “When no relief is given by the IHC, where do we go?” he said.
Justice Waheed suggested that the court could issue a notice that the appeal should be decided within two weeks before the court ultimately directed the IHC to decide on the applications for a stay of sentence.
Imaan, a rights activist and lawyer, and Chattha, a lawyer, were sentenced in January 2026 to a total of 17 years in prison on multiple charges linked to controversial social media posts that prosecutors argued amounted to an anti-government narrative under cybercrime laws.
Read more: FO rejects EU criticism over ‘domestic affairs’ of Imaan, Hadi verdict
Last month, Imaan approached the SC seeking stay of her sentence and moved the apex court after the IHC did not list her application for hearing. Filed through Siddiqi, the petition stated that despite her lawyer’s request to suspend the court’s sentence, the IHC only issued notices on the suspension application on February 19 and did not suspend the petitioner’s sentence.
The petition further argues that the trial court’s order was totally illegal and manifestly mala fide as it violated the requirement of fair trial under Article 10 and 10A of the Constitution of Pakistan, violating mandatory provisions of Sections 233, 234, 353, 367 and 526 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
