IHC sets June 1 hearing on Imaan Mazari, Hadi Chattha sentence suspension pleas

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has fixed June 1 for hearing applications seeking suspension of the sentences awarded to human rights lawyers Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir and Hadi Ali Chattha in the social media posts case.

According to a one-page written order issued by Justice Muhammad Azam Khan after last week’s proceedings, a certified copy of the Supreme Court’s May 12 order has now been placed on record. The Supreme Court had directed the IHC on May 12 to decide within two weeks the couple’s pleas for suspension of sentence.

Earlier this month, the high court had raised objections over the absence of a certified copy of the apex court’s order and directed defence counsel to submit it through the court office under the prescribed procedure. After the certified copy was filed, the matter was scheduled for June 1, and the IHC registrar office also issued the cause list for next week’s hearing.

On May 20, the IHC had issued notices to officials of the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) on applications seeking an early hearing of the sentence suspension petitions.

Case background

Imaan Mazari-Hazir and Hadi Ali Chattha have been in jail since their arrest in January in a case registered over a protest outside the IHC and allegations that they manhandled the president of the IHC Bar Association. Their arrest drew criticism from rights groups, politicians and journalists, who stressed the couple’s right to a fair trial.

A day after that development, a sessions court sentenced the two to 17 years in prison in the social media posts case. The case arose from a complaint filed on August 12, 2025, by the NCCIA Islamabad assistant director, who was also the investigating officer, before the Cybercrime Reporting Centre of the FIA under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016.

The complaint accused Imaan of disseminating and propagating narratives aligned with hostile terrorist groups and proscribed organisations, while Hadi was implicated for reposting some of her posts. In January, the sessions court sentenced the couple to 10 years under Section 10 of Peca relating to cyber terrorism, five years under Section 9 concerning glorification of an offence, and two years under Section 26-A relating to false and fake information.

Proceedings before the Supreme Court

In December 2025, the couple approached the Supreme Court against an IHC order refusing interim relief in the matter. Their appeal challenged the December 1 IHC order that had declined ad-interim relief to stay the trial.

In her appeal, Imaan argued that the high court had "erroneously and illegally refused" to exercise its discretion to grant ad-interim relief to the petitioners. She maintained that recording evidence before the trial court in their absence violated Section 353 of the Criminal Procedure Code as well as their due process and fair trial rights under Article 10A of the Constitution.

On May 11, their counsel submitted additional documents before the Supreme Court in connection with the appeal, including charge sheets of different dates, the petitioners’ statements before the trial court and court orders. The petitioners asked the apex court to take those documents on record in the interest of justice, saying they were essential and relevant for adjudication of the present case. They said the documents had not been available when the appeal was filed because the IHC office had not prepared the paper books and the trial record was obtained later.

Separately, on April 30, the couple filed another appeal in the Supreme Court seeking an early hearing of their pleas against conviction. Filed under Article 185(3) of the Constitution, the application sought leave to appeal against the IHC’s Feb 19 order. Through that order, the IHC had admitted their appeal against the trial court’s Jan 24 judgment sentencing them to 17 years in prison, issued notices to the respondents on the sentence suspension application, but did not suspend the sentence. The petition requested that the sentence awarded through the trial court judgment be suspended until the criminal appeal pending before the IHC is decided.