IHC adjourns hearing on Imran Khan's hospital transfer plea until March 12
The Islamabad High Court adjourned the hearing on Imran Khan's transfer to Shifa International Hospital until March 12, citing unpreparedness of his counsel. The case raises critical medical treatment issues for the former prime minister.

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday adjourned the hearing of a miscellaneous application seeking the transfer of Imran Khan, founder of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) and former prime minister, to Shifa International Hospital for medical treatment until March 12 after his counsel was found unprepared regarding relevant jail rules.
The case was heard by a two-member bench comprising Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir and Justice Khadim Hussain Soomro.
At the outset of the proceedings, the Advocate General for Islamabad informed the court that a report from the superintendent of Adiala Jail had been submitted. The bench, however, observed that the report should have been shared with the opposing counsel earlier.
During the hearing, PTI’s lawyer Sardar Latif Khosa read out the jail superintendent’s report, which included a press release from the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS).
According to the report, Imran Khan’s first medical examination was conducted at the jail hospital. Subsequently, he was taken to PIMS on two occasions. The second visit, the advocate general explained, was required for the administration of a medical injection.
The court was also informed that a PIMS doctor had earlier conducted a medical examination of the PTI founder within the jail premises and recommended that the injection be administered at the hospital.
Khosa told the bench that he had attached a report submitted by Friend of the Court Salman Safdar—which had earlier been presented before the Supreme Court of Pakistan—along with the miscellaneous application.
The judges asked whether they should first hear the main appeal or the application seeking medical relief.
Khosa recalled that Imran Khan had previously been detained at Attock Jail following his conviction in the Toshakhana case, describing his detention conditions at that time as unusual.
He said that a petition regarding Khan’s situation had been filed in the Supreme Court in 2023, which subsequently sought a report on the matter.
According to Khosa, when the case resurfaced in 2026 he informed the apex court that the PTI founder was suffering from an eye condition. He claimed the government denied the issue for several days before eventually issuing a press statement acknowledging it.
Referring to Safdar’s report, Khosa said the document recommended immediate treatment for the eye condition and warned that further delay could lead to serious medical complications.
When Justice Tahir asked what specific relief was being sought through the application, Khosa replied that the court was requested to order Imran Khan’s transfer to Shifa International Hospital and allow access to his personal physician as well as family members.
The federation opposed the request, with the Advocate General arguing that the application was not maintainable. He informed the court that, in compliance with directions of the Supreme Court, a medical board had already been constituted to supervise Khan’s treatment.
The board, he said, comprised PIMS doctors Dr Arif and Dr Nadeem Qureshi.
He further contended that the Supreme Court had not issued any directions regarding Safdar’s recommendations and that the high court could not grant such relief through the current application. The advocate general also cited a Supreme Court judgment and read out portions of the order before the bench, noting that in the relevant case Imran Khan’s sentence had been suspended and bail granted.
Justice Soomro pointed out that the judgment being referred to had later been followed by another order. Justice Tahir observed that since the matter had now come before the court, it would examine the legal position before deciding on the request.
Turning to Khosa, Justice Tahir asked him to propose what course of action the court should adopt.
The bench subsequently adjourned the hearing until March 12, noting that Khosa was not fully prepared to argue the case regarding applicable jail rules. Further proceedings in the matter were scheduled for the day after tomorrow.
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to join the discussion!






