The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Wednesday directed the Superintendent of Adiala Jail to obtain the signature of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan on a power of attorney during a hearing on appeals against his and Bushra Bibi's conviction in the Al-Qadir Trust case. A two-member bench comprising Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar and Justice Muhammad Asif heard the main appeal.
Court's Remarks on Arguments
During the hearing, the IHC Chief Justice remarked that the lawyers of Imran Khan and Bushra Bibi should begin arguments at the next hearing, warning that if arguments are not started, the law will take its course. Advocate Salman Safdar, representing the couple, expressed inability to immediately pursue appeals due to an eye condition requiring treatment abroad.
Application for Signature on Power of Attorney
Advocate Salman Akram Raja, presenting an application on behalf of Salman Safdar, argued that jail authorities are responsible for obtaining signatures on the power of attorney but are reluctant to do so. Justice Sarfraz Dogar suggested that if Salman Safdar is unavailable, a new lawyer should start arguments. The court remarked that the lawyers should approach the Federal Constitutional Court regarding the issue.
The bench issued directions and deferred the hearing. Separately, Bushra Bibi's daughter, Mubashra Khawar Maneka, filed a petition challenging her mother's solitary confinement in Adiala jail.
Petition for Meeting with Bushra Bibi
The IHC remanded the matter of Bushra Bibi's daughter's request for a meeting to the Superintendent of Adiala Jail for reconsideration. The bench directed the Superintendent to examine the matter afresh and decide in accordance with law whether the requested interview should be allowed. In case of refusal, a speaking order with reasons must be passed. Justice Arbab Muhammad Tahir issued these directions.
Arguments on Visitation Rights
Justice Arbab noted in his written judgment that the right of a prisoner to receive visitation during incarceration is recognized as an essential aspect of humane custody under the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (Nelson Mandela Rules). He cited Rule 3, which states that imprisonment shall not aggravate suffering beyond justifiable separation, and Rule 43(3), which protects family contact from disciplinary sanctions.
The judge found that the reasons advanced by the Superintendent for refusing the meeting, including alleged misuse of interview facility for political purposes, were not attributable to the petitioner. He noted that no family member had been permitted to meet Bushra Bibi since April 17, 2026, after she underwent a surgical procedure.
The court held that while the Superintendent retains authority to regulate interviews, an indefinite blanket prohibition without examining the petitioner's conduct is not permissible. Regarding access to a personal physician, including an eye specialist, the court noted that the prison has provided adequate medical treatment, and the matter falls under executive domain.
The petition was disposed of with directions for reconsideration of the meeting request and provision of daily-use articles, which had already been addressed.
