IHC summons Islamabad SSP over PTI harassment claims

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has summoned the Islamabad Senior Superintendent of Police (Operations) over allegations of harassment, raids and arrests involving Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leaders ahead of the party’s planned march towards the federal capital.

Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas issued the direction while hearing a petition filed by PTI leaders, including Malik Aamir Dogar and Shoaib Shaheen. The court has directed the SSP Operations to appear in person on September 24 and respond to the allegations.

During the hearing, the petitioners’ lawyer alleged that police officials had raided the residences of PTI leaders. The counsel argued that law enforcement authorities could not enter or search homes without proper legal authorisation.

The petition also requested the court to prevent police officials from allegedly violating the privacy and sanctity of the homes of PTI members.

The court’s intervention comes as Islamabad faces heightened security ahead of the PTI’s planned march and protest activities. Authorities have placed large numbers of shipping containers at different points across the capital to restrict movement on major routes.

More than 2,000 containers have reportedly been deployed in Islamabad and near Attock Bridge, an important route connecting Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and northern areas with Punjab.

The PTI has announced plans to march towards Islamabad while demanding the release of former prime minister Imran Khan. Several party workers and leaders have been detained in different cities in recent days.

Three of Imran Khan’s sisters have also been detained for 30 days under preventive detention orders ahead of the planned protest.

Separately, a petition has been filed in the IHC seeking the recovery of PTI MNA Sanaullah Mastikhel.

The petition was filed by Mastikhel’s relative, M. Kashif, who alleged that the lawmaker was taken away from Parliament Lodges on the evening of September 20.

According to the petition, the individuals who took Mastikhel away introduced themselves as security personnel. The petitioner claimed that they did not present an arrest warrant, FIR or any other legal document authorising his detention.

The petitioner said efforts had been made to locate Mastikhel, but his whereabouts remained unknown. He further alleged that neither the police nor the administration had provided information about the lawmaker.

The court has been requested to direct the authorities to recover Mastikhel and disclose whether any criminal case has been registered against him.

The petitioner has also sought details about the legal basis of the alleged detention and the circumstances in which the MNA was taken away.

The Islamabad High Court Bar Association (IHCBA) has separately expressed concern over what it described as harassment, intimidation and alleged unlawful detention of lawyers by Islamabad police.

In a statement, IHCBA Secretary Barrister Qasim Nawaz Abbasi said the legal community was aware of the prevailing law and order situation and did not want confrontation or further escalation.

However, the association said maintaining law and order could not justify unlawful interference with lawyers or detention without legal authority and due process.

The IHCBA called on the Islamabad police chief and senior officers to intervene and ensure that lawyers were not subjected to harassment or unlawful detention.

It also demanded investigations into complaints of alleged misconduct and called for action against officials found responsible.

The association said it had exercised restraint in the broader public interest. It warned that continued incidents could force it to pursue constitutional and legal remedies to protect its members and the independence of the legal profession.

Meanwhile, a separate legal dispute involving PTI MNA Junaid Akbar has also reached the IHC.

An Islamabad-based trader, Waqas Ahmed, has filed a contempt petition against the PTI leader through his lawyer, Advocate Akhtar Chhina.

The petition concerns remarks made by Junaid Akbar about the party’s planned march towards Islamabad. The petitioner alleged that the statement encouraged people to move towards the capital despite restrictions imposed by the high court.

Akbar had faced criticism over his reference to Somnath, a historic temple in India, while discussing PTI’s repeated protests in Islamabad. He later rejected the criticism and said his remarks had been given a different interpretation.

The petitioner argued that the statement amounted to a violation of the IHC’s earlier directions concerning protests and obstruction of public roads and facilities.

The IHC had previously ruled that political parties and their leaders could not lawfully occupy public roads, highways, interchanges, toll plazas or other public spaces in a manner that obstructed access to educational institutions and medical facilities.

The petitioner has asked the court to initiate contempt proceedings against Akbar and take action under the relevant law.