Lawyer Imaan Mazari and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha recieved a big relief from the court after the duo were arrested from Serena Chowk, Islamabad.
As per details, the pleas filed by the couple were heard by ATC Judge Abul Hasnat Muhammad Zulqarnain, and Imaan and Hadi’s bail was approved against surety bonds of Rs10,000 each.
The lawyer Riasat Ali Azad informed the court on behalf of the petitioners, saying that the case was fabricated and surfaced suddenly. He maintained that the FIR had no grounds and was based on a fictitious incident. Even those nominated were unaware of the case, he added.
Later, after hearing both arguments, the court reserved its verdict and later announced approval of the bail pleas.
Imaan Mazari, Husband Hadi Chatha arrested in Islamabad
Lawyer Imaan Mazari and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, were earlier arrested from Serena Chowk in Islamabad. Mazari and her Husband were arrested when they were on their way to the district and sessions court in Islamabad from the Islamabad High Court (IHC) Bar.
Imaan Mazari, Hadi FIRs
It is worth mentioning here that the National Cyber Crime Investigation Agency (NCCIA) registered an FIR No. 234/2025 on August 22, 2025, against human rights lawyer Imaan Zainab Mazari and her husband, Advocate Hadi Ali Chattha, under Sections 9, 10, 11, and 26-A of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act (PECA).
The charges relate to controversial social media posts by Mazari (with Chattha accused of reposting), which supported the banned group Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA), spread hatred, promoted ethnic divisions, incited fear, falsely portrayed state institutions as involved in terrorism, and disseminated fake information.
The accused were initially not arrested and received pre-arrest bail. However, over the past five months, the trial court held 44 hearings and called the case 104 times. The accused reportedly remained absent 53 times, leading to seven instances of non-bailable arrest warrants being issued (later recalled multiple times). The court showed considerable patience, but prosecutors said that the repeated non-appearances and alleged media statements mocking the process deliberately delayed justice and insulted the court.
Ultimately, due to continued absences, the trial court cancelled their bail and issued fresh non-bailable arrest warrants, directing authorities to arrest them promptly.
Prosecutors have questioned whether the accused’s conduct amounts to intentional contempt of court, efforts to paralyze the judicial system, and deliberate delays in justice. They noted that ordinary accused rarely receive such leniency. The case, according to the state, is not about restricting freedom of expression but about challenging the law, state authority, and court proceedings through obstructive tactics.
If the posts are defensible, the proper forum is the courtroom through legal arguments, not repeated delays.
