September 24, 2026
By Hashir Ahsan
ISLAMABAD
A case was heard today at the Anti Terrorism Court (ATC) Islamabad, regarding the non-receipt of Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali’s vakalatnamas or power of attorney document, for filing their bail applications. The hearing was presided over by Justice Tahir Abbas Sipra.
During the hearing, advocates Riasat Ali Azad, Zainab Janjua, and others appeared before the court on behalf of Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chatha. Imaan’s mother Shireen Mazari and the Deputy Superintendent of Adiala Jail, appearing on court orders were also present.
During the proceedings, Advocate Riasat Ali Azad informed the court that Hadi Ali Chatha’s vakalatnama had been received, whereas Imaan Mazari’s had not been received yet.
On this, Justice Sipra said that the jail authorities have established a system regarding vakalatnamas, and matters related to jail vakalatnamas are to be overseen by the Sessions’ Court as they are responsible for it. Judge Sipra also mentioned that on the request of the lawyers, he had called for a report from Adiala Jail, and inquired about the situation in jail.
The report by the Adiala jail authorities was presented in court, revealing that according to the register and digital jail records, the vakalatnamas of both Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali Chatha had not reached them in jail. Judge Tahir Abbas Sipra remarked that Hadi Ali Chatha’s vakalatnama had arrived, after all. However, making another revelation, the DSP Adiala jail told the court that the signatures on this vakalatnama were not his and that he had not signed Hadi Ali Chatha’s vakalatnama. He suggested that the court call for a report from the Superintendent of Jail to verify it.
Advocate Zainab Janjua told the court that she had met the same DSP Jail in his office premesis on Monday, and he had said that the vakalatnamas would be processed in a couple of days. Advocate Zainab Janjua asked, “What should we do now? Please hand over the vakalatnamas to them right now.”
Advocate Riasat Ali Azad took the stance that both accused were sent to jail on the order of this very court; the signatures have arrived on one person’s vakalatnama while they were not present on the other’s—did this mean the second accused was not in jail? He added that Imaan Mazari’s mother (Shireen Mazari) was present here, who had given them authority, and that she would corroborate this. Advocate Riasat Ali Azad said that this was a first case of a kind, where they have not been getting the vakalatnamas from jail since a week. “This court is not granting them a fair trial.” he said.
At this point, Judge Sipra stopped him from speaking any inappropriate words regarding the remand order, saying that if they had not challenged that order, they could not criticize it in this manner.
Advocate Riasat Ali Azad said that if that order is correct, then both accused are in the custody of the jail authorities, and if anything happens to them in jail, the jail authorities would be held responsible.
Judge Sipra said that a forum had been created by the High Court (Sessions Court), and the serial number was also available.
He questioned, “Where did you get Hadi’s vakalatnama from?”
Advocate Zainab Janjua replied that they received it from the Sessions’ Court through the procedure. Judge Tahir Abbas Sipra remarked that the jail authorities have not denied Hadi’s signature or thumb impression; instead they have only clarified that it was not the DSP’s signature on the vakalatnama.
The DSP said that he had asked that the vakalatnamas should be submitted through the process, but that neither Imaan Mazari’s nor Hadi Ali Chatha’s vakalatnamas had reached them; in fact, an inquiry is currently underway at their end as to how these signatures were affixed.
Advocate Riasat Ali Azad raised the question that when they have already completed the process , yet still do not get the vakalatnama, what else are they supposed to do? To this, Judge Tahir Abbas Sipra said that they should then hold accountable the place from where the inspection/processing was conducted.
Advocate Riasat Ali Azad said that a human life was at stake: “How do we know if they have killed Imaan Mazari?”
Along with this, Dr. Shireen Mazari stated in court that the vakalatnamas they had taken themselves were not accepted by them, and asked that they be sworn on the Quran.
Expressing her apprehension, she said, “How do we know if they have killed my child or made her disappear?”
Judge Tahir Abbas Sipra issued instructions to the jail authorities once again to collect the vakalatnamas from the Sessions’ Court, record them in the register, get them signed, and hand them over.
Subsequently, the court adjourned the further hearing of the case until September 26.
Application submitted by counsels
An application was filed in the Anti-Terrorism Court No. 1, by the counsels for Imaan Zainab Mazari and Hadi Ali Chatha in FIR No. 276/2025 registered at Police Station Kohsar, Islamabad, praying for appropriate orders under the relevant provisions of law.
In the application, it is stated that Imaan Mazari and Hadi Ali wish to formally appoint the undersigned as their counsel/lawyer for the post-arrest bail application in the aforementioned case. It is submitted in the application that since September 18, 2026, the lawyers have made multiple attempts to meet the accused in Central Jail Adiala, Rawalpindi, and to get the Power of Attorney signed by them, where they are currently on judicial remand pursuant to the order of this august court dated September 17, 2026.
Furthermore, an unsuccessful attempt was also made through the court to get the vakalatnama verified and executed, which is extraordinary and incomprehensible.
According to the application, as the accused are in judicial custody under the orders of this court, the responsibility to protect their rights and to ensure their right to representation through a counsel of their choice lies upon this honorable court.
Therefore, it is the responsibility of the court to ensure the execution and verification of the vakalatnama in favor of the counsel through the jail authorities without any delay and in a timely manner.
They prayed that the court direct the concerned jail authorities to properly execute and verify the accused’s power of attorney in favor of the counsel, and submit it to the court at the earliest, and grant any other appropriate relief according to the circumstances of the case.