The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Tuesday directed the Islamabad High Court (IHC) to decide within two weeks on petitions seeking suspension of sentences filed by lawyer and rights activist Imaan Mazari and her husband Hadi Ali Chattha, while keeping the matter pending before itself until the IHC issues a ruling.
A three-member bench headed by Justice Shahid Waheed heard the case. During proceedings, counsel for the petitioners, Advocate Faisal Siddiqi, informed the court that the IHC had only issued notices on the appeals against the sentence but had not conducted any substantive hearing for more than two months.
He argued that the petitioners were left without relief at the high court level and urged the apex court to ensure a timely decision on the suspension request.
However, Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan observed that no adverse order had been passed by the IHC against the petitioners. He noted that the high court had neither dismissed nor rejected the suspension application, questioning the legal basis for intervention at this stage.
The bench also examined the legal standards governing suspension of sentences, with Justice Afghan asking what conditions must be met for such relief. He remarked that had the high court rejected the plea, the Supreme Court could have examined the merits of the case in detail.
Advocate Siddiqi maintained that the petitioners were effectively stuck in legal limbo, arguing that they had been denied timely consideration of their application.
After hearing arguments, Justice Shahid Waheed suggested issuing an observation directing the IHC to decide the matter within a fixed timeframe. The bench ultimately ordered the high court to dispose of the suspension petitions within two weeks, while retaining the case before the Supreme Court until compliance.
The case stems from a January 2026 trial court verdict in which Mazari and Chattha were sentenced to a combined 17 years in prison over allegations related to controversial social media posts. The prosecution claimed the content amounted to an anti-state narrative under cybercrime provisions.
The petition before the Supreme Court argues that the trial court judgment was unlawful and passed in violation of due process guarantees under Articles 10 and 10A of the Constitution, as well as multiple procedural provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The legal battle continues as both the Supreme Court and Islamabad High Court remain engaged in determining the fate of the sentence suspension applications.
