Categories Courts

SC declares Imran Khan’s arrest illegal

While declaring the arrest of former prime minister and chairman Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Imran Khan illegal on Thursday, the Supreme Court directed him to appear before the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Friday for remedy.
Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial directed the concerned authorities to release the PTI chief “immediately” but said that Imran Khan will be kept in the Police Lines Guest House under top court’s ‘supervision’.
A three-member bench led by the Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar and Justice Athar Minallah passed the orders while hearing the former prime minister’s plea against his arrest in the Al-Qadir Trust case.
On Thursday, taking up the PTI’s petition, the three-member bench of the top court issued directives at 4:30pm to the concerned authorities to produce Imran Khan before the Supreme Court in an hour; however, Inspector General Police produced Imran Khan at 5:56pm saying security arrangements caused delay in his appearance before the court.
When the hearing resumed, after Imran Khan’s arrival, the CJP called the PTI chairman to the rostrum and said: “Happy to see you.” “There have been incidents of violence after your arrest,” Chief Justice Bandial said that the court wanted peace in the country. “It is being said that your [PTI] workers came out in rage,” he said and told Imran that the court wanted to hear him.
“According to the Constitution, a person serving the nation is ameen (honest),” he remarked. “Your rival may not seem to be right, but they are a reality.” The CJP asked that he expected the other party to play its role as well, stressing that “we are sure that you want the rule of law”. Justice Bandial also said that he was threatened and told to “wait for an attack” on him.
After the SC passed the order, Imran Khan said that no harm should be caused to the country and asked his supporters to remain peaceful. “We only want elections in the country,” he maintained. He apprised the court that he was hit with batons. “Even criminals are not treated this way,” Khan stated, adding, “How am I responsible for the protests while I was in prison?”
The PTI’s legal team led by Hamid Khan appeared before the court in the morning. Hamid Khan apprised the bench that Imran Khan fundamental right was breached as he came to IHC for bail but he was arrested from the court premises. Hamid Khan argued that his client was in the room for biometrics from where he was arrested by the personnel after breaking into the room.
A counsel for the PTI Salman Safdar submitted that approximately 80 to 100 Rangers personnel entered the court premises and arrested Imran Khan.
During the hearing, Prosecutor General NAB Asghar Haider appeared before the court. The bench asked how the compliance with the warrant was done. “I’m unaware of the matter and will update the court about the matter”, Haider said.
Responding to the submission of Asghar Haider that the NAB respected the country’s courts, Justice Minallah observed the NAB had “not learnt its lessons”. He observed that NAB had been accused of many things, including “political engineering”. “Had NAB taken permission from the registrar?” he asked, adding that a letter had been written to the interior ministry for the warrant’s execution.
The NAB official responded to the judge’s queries by saying that he was not aware of the realities and had been posted at 1:30pm.
Justice Minallah then said that a common citizen could also execute an arrest warrant. “Did NAB issue directives to arrest [Imran] from inside the court? How many notices were issued to Imran Khan?” he asked. The prosecutor general responded by saying that only one notice had been issued to the PTI chief.  “It appears that NAB’s warrant was not in accordance with the law. Was an attempt to arrest made after the warrant was issued?” Justice Minallah asked.
“What was left of the honor of the court when 90 people entered the court premises? NAB has disrespected the court,” the chief justice said, adding that no one would feel safe when visiting a court in the future.  “No one can be arrested from the high court, Supreme Court, or the accountability court,” he said. “Imran Khan’s arrest has violated judicial sanctity.”

Author

More From Author

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like

Khudayar Mohla, Sindh High Court, SHC Karachi, Federal Investigation Agency, FIA Pakistan, Pest Management Services (Private) Limited, Methyl Bromide import, illegal Indian imports, Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry, Justice Abdul Mobeen Lakho, Enquiry No. ENQ-ACC-KHI-1/26, Imports and Exports (Control) Act 1950, Federal Investigation Agency Act 1974, Agricultural Pesticides Ordinance 1971, Section 160 CrPC, writ petition dismissal, jurisdictional challenge, forged import permits, trade with India, Anti-Corruption Circle Karachi, pesticide import regulations, chemical smuggling investigation, Paras Ali Lodhi, Saddam Hussain Chang, Shazia Hanjra Deputy Attorney General, Department of Plant Protection, Pakistan trade law, industrial chemical enquiry.

SHC Upholds FIA Jurisdiction in Probe into Prohibited Chemical Imports

KARACHI: While dismissing a plea seeking directives against the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), a division…

Khudayar Mohla, Supreme Court Pakistan, Sindh High Court contempt case, contempt of court Pakistan, preliminary hearing requirement, Article 204 Constitution Pakistan, Contempt of Court Ordinance 2003, Supreme Court verdict 2026, SHC orders set aside, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hira Rauf case, Mushtaq Ahmed case Pakistan, procedural law Pakistan, prima facie case law, contempt proceedings Pakistan, judicial procedure Pakistan, intra court appeal Pakistan, legal lapses in court orders, due process in contempt cases, Pakistan judiciary news, Supreme Court rulings Pakistan, constitutional law Pakistan, legal rights of accused contemnor

SC Sets Aside SHC Verdict, Rules Preliminary Hearing Mandatory Before Framing Charge in Contempt Proceedings

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has set aside Sindh High Court orders in a contempt matter,…

khudayar Mohla, Justice Jawad Hassan,Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed, Sheikh Rasheed Umrah travel ban, Lahore High Court Rawalpindi Bench, LHC Rawalpindi verdict, Anti-Terrorism Court Pakistan, Section 28-A Anti-Terrorism Act 1997, ATA passport impoundment, Justice Jawad Hassan, Justice Tariq Mahmood Bajwa, Intra Court Appeal Pakistan, ICA No 76 2025, Division Bench LHC, passport impounded by operation of law, freedom of movement Article 15 Constitution Pakistan, reasonable restriction fundamental rights Pakistan, Provincial National Identification List, PNIL Pakistan, Exit Control List Pakistan, ECL Pakistan, no estoppel against law Pakistan, judicial estoppel Pakistan, writ petition LHC, constitutional jurisdiction High Court Pakistan, Additional Attorney General Pakistan, Federal Investigation Agency Pakistan, FIA passport impounding, anti-terrorism law Pakistan, charge-sheeted accused travel ban Pakistan, ATC permission travel abroad, Umrah travel permission Pakistan court, legislative intent Section 28-A, mandatory legal presumption ATA, appellate jurisdiction LHC, Law Reforms Ordinance 1972, Pakistan terrorism trial travel restrictions, criminal justice Pakistan, passport impounding terrorism accused, Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed court case, Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed 2025 2026, LHC sets aside Umrah permission, Pakistan court ruling travel ban, Pakistan High Court anti-terrorism verdict

LHC Rawalpindi Bench Sets Aside Sheikh Rasheed’s Umrah Travel Order, Rules ATC is Sole Authority for Passport Impoundment Under Anti-Terrorism Law

RAWALPINDI: While interpreting the legislative intent behind Section 28-A of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, read…