ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday summoned the senior superintendent of police (operations) on September 24 in a petition concerning alleged harassment of PTI leaders and raids on their homes ahead of the party’s scheduled long march to the capital.

Meanwhile, the Islamabad High Court Bar Association (IHCBA) has also claimed that police were intimidating and detaining members of the legal fraternity.

The IHC directives came as Justice Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas heard a petition filed by PTI leaders, including Malik Aamir Dogar and Shoaib Shaheen, challenging alleged police harassment and raids on the residences of party leaders.

According to the court order, the petitioners’ counsel informed the judge that police officials were conducting allegedly illegal raids on the homes of PTI leaders.

The counsel pleaded that raids could not be conducted without proper legal authorisation and requested the court to restrain Islamabad police officials from violating the sanctity of homes and the privacy of households, the order said.

Issuing the order, the IHC summoned the Islamabad SSP (operations) to appear in person on September 24 to address the allegations raised in the petition.

The proceedings come amid heightened security measures in the federal capital in connection with the PTI’s long march and protest activities.

Recovery plea for MNA Sanaullah Mastikhel

Separately, a petition was also filed on Tuesday before the IHC seeking the recovery of PTI MNA Sanaullah Mastikhel, who the petitioner claimed was taken from Parliament Lodges on the evening of September 20.

According to the petition, filed by Mastikhel’s relative M. Kashif, the individuals who took the lawmaker away identified themselves as personnel of security agencies.

The petitioner alleged that they did not produce any arrest warrant, first information report (FIR) or legal order authorising his detention.

The petition stated that extensive efforts had been made to locate Mastikhel, but no information regarding his whereabouts had been obtained.

It further claimed that neither the police nor the administration had provided details regarding the matter.

The petitioner requested the IHC to direct the authorities to recover the PTI lawmaker and disclose whether any criminal cases have been registered against him.

The petition also sought information about the legal grounds for his alleged detention and the circumstances surrounding his disappearance.

In a statement on Monday, the PTI alleged that five of its MNAs had been taken away from Parliament Lodges. Another MPA was also reported missing.

IHCBA condemns intimidation of lawyers, advocates

Also on Tuesday, the IHCBA strongly condemned what it described as “repeated harassment, intimidation and alleged unlawful detention” of members of the legal fraternity by Islamabad police.

In a press release signed by its secretary Barrister Qasim Nawaz Abbasi, the association stated that it was conscious of the prevailing law and order situation and did not seek confrontation, disruption or escalation.

The bar association said it expected the same restraint and responsibility from law enforcement authorities.

“Maintenance of law and order cannot be a justification for unlawful interference with lawyers, intimidation of advocates or deprivation of liberty without lawful authority and due process,” the statement said.

The IHCBA called upon the Islamabad inspector general of police (IG) and senior police officers to “immediately intervene, restrain their personnel and ensure that no lawyer was subjected to harassment, intimidation or unlawful detention”.

It further demanded that complaints of unlawful conduct be promptly investigated and that officials found responsible be held accountable in accordance with the law.

The bar association stressed that it had exercised restraint in the larger public interest, but cautioned that such restraint should not be mistaken for weakness or consent.

“If such conduct continues, the association will be compelled to invoke all constitutional and legal remedies available to protect its members and the independence of the legal profession,” the statement asserted.

The IHCBA reiterated its commitment to peace and public order and expressed the expectation that police leadership would ensure that the situation did not reach a point of confrontation.

Contempt plea filed against Junaid Akbar

Meanwhile, a controversy surrounding a statement by PTI MNA Junaid Akbar has also reached the IHC, with a local trader filing a contempt of court petition against him.

In his remarks regarding his party’s upcoming march, he said that they would turn Islamabad into Somnath, a historic Indian temple, and “would keep on lifting corpses and new people would also come”.

However, Akbar had refuted the criticism over his statement, maintaining that his reference to Somnath was related to PTI’s repeated return to Islamabad and was given a “wrong spin”.

The petition was filed by Islamabad-based trader Waqas Ahmed through his counsel, Advocate Akhtar Chhina, alleging that Akbar violated the IHC’s September 14 judgment by allegedly inciting and provoking people to march to the federal capital.

According to the petition, Akbar, through his statement, allegedly encouraged the public to proceed towards Islamabad, despite the restrictions and directions outlined in the IHC ruling.

In its judgment, the IHC stated that no political party or its leadership had the “lawful right to occupy public roads, highways, interchanges, toll plazas and buildings in Islamabad that would obstruct in any manner access to educational institutions and medical facilities”.

The petitioner requested the court to initiate contempt proceedings against the PTI leader for allegedly disregarding the judicial order and to take action in accordance with the law.

The petition also referred to a Supreme Court judgment concerning former senator and Sindh Governor Nihal Hashmi, who was sentenced to one month in prison and fined Rs50,000 in a contempt of court case in 2018.

The petitioner argued that the court’s directions were binding and that any alleged violation of its orders should be examined under the applicable legal framework.