The National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) has approached the Supreme Court seeking withdrawal of its earlier order that directed the Islamabad High Court to decide sentence suspension pleas of lawyer and human rights activist Imaan Mazari and her husband Hadi Ali Chattha.
The move comes in connection with a case involving controversial social media posts under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), where both individuals were previously sentenced.
Moreover, the agency has argued that the Supreme Court should not intervene in matters already pending before a high court, as such jurisdiction lies within the relevant judicial forum.
Background of the Case
In January, a district and sessions court in Islamabad sentenced Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha to a combined 17 years of imprisonment each under multiple provisions of the PECA law.
The sentencing followed their arrest in a separate case, after which the couple challenged the verdict in the Islamabad High Court in early February.
Subsequently, the Supreme Court issued a directive last month instructing the Islamabad High Court to decide their sentence suspension applications by May 26.
The order was passed by a three-member bench during the hearing of their appeals seeking suspension of sentences.
NCCIA Argument Before Supreme Court
In its fresh petition, the NCCIA contended that the Supreme Court cannot issue directions in matters already under consideration by a high court.
The agency maintained that decisions on suspension of sentence applications fall within the jurisdiction of the respective high courts, which must hear all parties and decide independently.
Furthermore, it argued that the May 12 directive from the Supreme Court interfered with established judicial procedure and should therefore be withdrawn to ensure procedural fairness.
The NCCIA also stated that no party should be granted preferential treatment in judicial proceedings, emphasizing the principle of parity before the law.
Additionally, it maintained that litigants cannot directly challenge high court procedural actions before the Supreme Court in a manner that bypasses proper legal channels.
Supreme Court Requested to Recall Order
The agency has requested the apex court to recall its May 12 order so that the case can proceed before the Islamabad High Court without external direction.
According to the petition, allowing the high court to independently hear the matter would ensure adherence to legal procedure and judicial consistency.
The NCCIA has stressed that all proceedings must remain within the established legal framework without overlapping jurisdictional intervention.
Islamabad High Court Hearing Adjourned
In separate proceedings, the Islamabad High Court adjourned the hearing of the couple’s sentence suspension pleas after the special prosecution team failed to appear.
The case was heard by Justice Muhammad Azam Khan, who was informed that members of the prosecution team were unavailable due to other court engagements and travel commitments.
The court was told that one member had traveled from Lahore, while another was occupied with proceedings in another courtroom, preventing their attendance.
Court Observations and Proceedings
During the hearing, the judge noted that he had been nominated for mediation training and was present solely for this case, even missing his scheduled session due to court proceedings.
He also inquired whether the prosecution was aware of the Supreme Court’s earlier order in the matter.
State counsel informed the court that the time granted under the apex court directive had already expired, while also confirming that the petitions were filed in line with Supreme Court instructions.
The defense counsel suggested that the matter could proceed once the prosecution team became available.
However, the prosecution requested that the hearing be scheduled for a later date due to ongoing engagements.
Hearing Adjourned Until June 4
After hearing all sides, the Islamabad High Court adjourned the proceedings and rescheduled the matter for June 4.
The court also noted concerns raised by the defense over repeated delays and adjournments, although it emphasized that all parties must comply with Supreme Court directives.
As a result, the legal proceedings in the case remain ongoing, with both jurisdictional and procedural questions still under consideration.
Conclusion
The case involving Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha continues to move through multiple judicial layers, with both the Supreme Court and Islamabad High Court actively engaged in proceedings.
While NCCIA challenges the apex court’s earlier directive, the high court has adjourned the matter due to prosecution absence.
Consequently, the legal dispute now involves both procedural and jurisdictional questions that remain unresolved as hearings continue.
