Proceedings in the high-profile social media posts case against lawyers Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir and Hadi Ali Chatha took a dramatic turn on Tuesday. Tensions escalated during the hearing as lawyers for the prosecution and defence nearly came to blows. A heated exchange followed intense cross-examination of prosecution witnesses. Police were forced to intervene to restore order inside the courtroom.
The case is being heard at the District and Sessions Court in Islamabad. Additional District and Sessions Judge Muhammad Afzal Majoka presided over the proceedings. Both accused appeared in court along with their legal teams.
Cross-Examination Exposes Procedural Gaps
The court resumed recording prosecution witness statements last week. This followed fresh directions issued by the Islamabad High Court (IHC). The IHC had ordered a restart of witness testimony while hearing a petition filed by Mazari. She had challenged a November 19 trial court order.
During cross-examination, several inconsistencies were highlighted. NCCIA Naib Qasid Afzal admitted he did not possess copies of his service card or contract. He also conceded that official letters received on October 16 and October 20 did not mention receipt times.
Hadi Chatha questioned discrepancies in signatures on official documents. These differences raised doubts about record authenticity. Another prosecution witness, Wasim, testified that he had worked with the FIA for five years. He said he had served with the NCCIA since its formation.
Wasim admitted he only carried an FIA service card. He did not have an NCCIA-issued card. He also confirmed that a USB provided by the investigating officer was not sealed. He told the court he had no written contract outlining his duties. He further stated he was unaware of any FIA circular barring FIR registration without prior notice.
Forensic Evidence and “State-Hostile Narrative” Debate
The most intense exchange occurred during the cross-examination of technical expert Anis. He told the court he had prepared over 5,200 forensic reports. He also claimed to be the sole technical expert at the NCCIA.
Anis explained that his report relied on surface analysis. It examined seven screenshots and fourteen social media posts. He said the analysis followed a scope letter issued by the investigating officer.
Under questioning, Anis admitted key omissions. Neither the complaint nor the scope letter mentioned the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM). The names Manzoor Pashteen and Ali Wazir were also absent. He confirmed the post under review dated back to October 31, 2021. The individuals referenced were declared proscribed in 2024.
Despite this, the witness insisted the posts promoted a “state-hostile narrative.” The defence strongly challenged this claim. Chatha questioned whether references to enforced disappearances made by courts or cabinet members would also be considered anti-state. The witness declined to respond, citing limits of his mandate.
Courtroom Tensions and Case Background
Tempers flared as sharp remarks were exchanged. A physical confrontation was narrowly avoided. Police stepped in to prevent escalation. Judge Majoka ordered the prosecution to apologise for inappropriate language. He reminded both sides to raise objections respectfully through the court.
After a brief recess, further questioning revealed that dozens of other accounts had shared the same content. No action was taken against them. The witness admitted the investigation focused only on the accused.
The case originates from a complaint filed on August 12, 2025, by an NCCIA investigating officer. The complaint was lodged under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA), 2016. Mazari was accused of spreading narratives aligned with proscribed groups. Chatha was implicated for reposting some content.
An FIR was registered on August 22, 2025, under sections 9, 10, 11, and 26-A of PECA. The couple was indicted on October 30. Last week, the Supreme Court stayed trial proceedings pending appeals before the IHC.
The court has adjourned the matter until January 5, when cross-examination of the technical expert will resume.
