ATC adjourns Imaan, Hadi bail hearing till Oct 13 after IO fails to appear

An Anti-Terrorism Court (ATC) on Monday adjourned the hearing of bail applications filed by Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chattha until October 13 in a case registered over terrorism charges and violation of Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), after the investigating officer (IO) failed to appear before the court. Section 144 of the CrPC states power to issue an order absolute at once in urgent cases of nuisance or apprehended danger. ATC Judge Abul Hasnat Muhammad Zulqarnain expressed displeasure over the officer’s absence. “I will issue an order regarding the unavailability of the investigating officer,” the judge said. The proceedings took an unusual turn when a court official initially told the judge that the IO was “out”. “Out where?” the judge asked before directing officials to summon the DSP in person. “Verbal statements will not be accepted,” the judge observed. The court briefly adjourned before the DSP appeared with a report. He told the judge that the IO was in Gilgit-Baltistan and that his phone was switched off. He said it could take “10 to 15 days” to establish contact with the officer. “Until we are able to contact him, I cannot give out information,” the DSP added. The explanation further irked the judge, who expressed displeasure over what he termed incorrect information provided to the court. He also directed security personnel to ensure that the DSP did not leave the premises without permission. The judge ordered handcuffs to be brought into the courtroom and instructed the security in-charge to arrest the official if he attempted to leave after an order to that effect. Also Read: Islamabad ATC ends contempt proceedings as Imaan, Hadi sign powers of attorney for litigation Addressing the legal counsel for the suspects, Judge Zulqarnain said, “There should be a judicial force so that the court can have its orders implemented immediately.” Referring to the existing judicial system, he remarked that “the system of 1898 and 1860 is still being followed.” At the onset of the hearing, petitioners’ counsel Riasat Ali Azad argued that all sections incorporated in the first information report (FIR), except the terrorism provision, were bailable. He also reminded the court that the request for physical remand of Imaan and Chattha had previously been rejected. “This is a bail case, and the sections invoked are bailable,” Azad said, adding that he was prepared to present detailed arguments if required by the court. Azad later questioned the prosecution’s handling of the case and alleged mala fide intent. “Look how old this FIR is,” he said, accusing the authorities of making “a mockery of the courts”. Another defence counsel, Zafar Khokhar, questioned the IO’s handling of the case record. “It does not work like this, that the IO takes the case record with him,” he said. Azad maintained that the court did not necessarily have to wait for the case record to proceed with the bail matter. He also reminded the court that it had already granted time until Monday for the matter to be taken up. The court subsequently adjourned the hearing until October 13, with the judge indicating that he would issue a detailed order concerning the IO’s absence. Case background Imaan and her husband Hadi Ali Chattha were rearrested on September 17, shortly after the Supreme Court granted them bail and suspended their sentences in a separate social-media posts case. They were produced before an Islamabad Anti-Terrorism Court in connection with a case registered at Kohsar Police Station. Police sought 30-day physical remand, but ATC Judge Abul Hasnat Muhammad Zulqarnain rejected the request and sent the couple on judicial remand. The judge noted that although they had been nominated in the FIR as members of an unlawful assembly, no weapon had been attributed to either accused. Read More: SC suspends trial court order, grants bail to Imaan Mazari, Hadi Ali Chattha On September 27, the court issued a contempt notice to the Adiala jail superintendent after the authorities failed to facilitate the signing and transmission of the documents and also failed to produce the accused through video link. Two days later, the issue was resolved after Imaan and Chattha signed the required powers of attorney. On September 29, the ATC ended the contempt proceedings against the jail authorities and separately confirmed that notices had been issued on the couple’s bail applications, with arguments scheduled before Judge Abul Hasnat.