Anti-Terrorism Court Islamabad rejected 30-day physical remand request of police and ordered that Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha be sent to jail on judicial remand, reported 24NewsHD TV Channel.
Anti-Terrorism Court Judge Abul Hasnat Muhammad Zulqarnain heard the case. Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha were booked in a case registered at the Kohsar Police Station.
During the hearing of the case, Iman Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha were produced before the Anti-Terrorism Court. The court ordered that Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha be sent to jail on judicial remand. Earlier, Islamabad police arrested right activist and lawyer Eman Mazari and her husband Hadi Chattah again from Adiala Jail Rawlapindi and produced them before ATC Islamabad.
The SSP (Operations) Qazi Ali Raza arrived at Adiala Jail late night accompanied by a contingent of Islamabad Police personnel and SHOs from various Islamabad police stations.
Earlier, Supreme Court (SC) Thursday accepted the petitions filed by human rights lawyer Imaan Mazari and her husband Hadi Ali Chattha for the suspension of their sentences in controversial tweets case and order their release.
A three-member bench of the SC, headed by Justice Shahid Waheed, heard the case.
Justice Waheed said that a two-member bench of the apex court was hearing the case. “The same bench will hear the case,” he added.
Imaan, a rights activist and lawyer, and Chattha, an advocate, were in January 2026 handed a combined 17-year-sentence on multiple charges linked to controversial social media posts that the prosecution argued amounted to an anti-state narrative under cybercrime laws.
On January 24, an Islamabad sessions court had sentenced Imaan Mazari and Hadi to a total of 17 years in jail on multiple charges under the PECA. On Thursday, the SC ordered the couple’s release after granting them bail against surety bonds of Rs200,000. It ordered their release on bail pending the IHC’s final verdict.
“Both are lawyers and we are keeping their honour,” observed Justice Afghan, but also asked senior counsel Faisal Siddiqui, the couple’s lawyer, to tell the appellants to observe the court’s decorum. “There is a difference between a lawyer and an ordinary person,” the judge observed.
Siddiqui argued that the SC had issued its first order on May 12 in which the IHC was asked to decide the applicants’ petition for suspension of sentence as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two weeks.
On May 12, the SC ordered the IHC to decide Imaan and Hadi’s sentence suspension pleas within two weeks. Despite the May 26 deadline having already passed, the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) challenged the SC order and sought its withdrawal.
During the proceedings, Siddiqui also read out the order sheets from various IHC hearings.
At one point, the SC directed Additional Attorney General (AAG) Rana Asadullah Khan, who was standing at the rostrum, to take a seat, adding that the court will hear Siddiqui first.
“Let him sit, though he has certainly worn us out,” Siddiqui quipped and cited former chief justice Asif Saeed Khosa’s remarks that a case would only be adjourned upon the death of a judge or a lawyer.
The counsel regretted that the IHC adjourned the case multiple times and that his clients’ request for an early hearing was rejected by the high court’s registrar office.
“What transpired at the high court came as a surprise to us,” the counsel said.
“These days are an era of surprises,” remarked Justice Ibrahim.
During the hearing, the AAG contended that the IHC has not yet issued any adverse ruling, adding that seven opportunities were provided in the trial court. He highlighted that the judicial forum for the suspension of a sentence under Section 426 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) was the high court.
Justice Afghan observed that the IHC always cited the SC directives for early disposal of the case but does not act upon them. The judge also asked AAG Khan whether he would give any assurance that proceedings would be held at the next IHC hearing, to which the latter replied that he cannot represent any high court judge in the SC.
Later, the SC suspended the sentence of the applicants and ordered their release on bail, pending the IHC’s final verdict.
Reporter: Amanat Gishkori