KillBait - News highlights delivered clearly and responsibly—no clickbait, no sensationalism
NCCIA approaches Supreme Court seeking withdrawal of order directing IHC on sentence suspension pleas of Imaan Mazari and Hadi Chattha
Photo: geo.tv
2026-06-01 17:34   Justice   10

NCCIA approaches Supreme Court seeking withdrawal of order directing IHC on sentence suspension pleas of Imaan Mazari and Hadi Chattha

The National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) has approached the Supreme Court of Pakistan seeking withdrawal of its earlier order that directed the Islamabad High Court (IHC) to decide the sentence suspension applications of lawyer and rights activist Imaan Mazari and her husband Hadi Ali Chattha.

The case stems from a January ruling by a district and sessions court in Islamabad, which sentenced both individuals to a cumulative 17 years in prison each under different sections of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA) in a case related to controversial social media posts.Following their conviction, the couple filed appeals in the IHC in February seeking suspension of their sentences.Last month, the Supreme Court had directed the IHC to decide these suspension pleas by May 26.

However, the NCCIA has now argued before the apex court that it should not interfere in matters already pending before a high court and that the authority to decide suspension applications rests solely with the concerned high court after hearing all parties.

The agency further contended that the Supreme Court’s directive of May 12 was inconsistent with judicial principles of maintaining jurisdictional boundaries and requested its withdrawal, arguing that all parties should be treated equally under the law.It also maintained that no special treatment should be granted to the accused and that the principle of parity must be upheld.Meanwhile, separate proceedings at the Islamabad High Court were also delayed as the special prosecution team failed to appear before the bench.

Justice Muhammad Azam Khan adjourned the hearing until June 4 after being informed that members of the prosecution team were unavailable due to conflicting engagements in other courts.The repeated delays were noted by the bench, and counsel for the petitioners urged the court to ensure the matter is not further adjourned.

Full reading at geo.tv

2186 
Top Trends
Topics
Top visited