Court Issues Notice To Jail Officials Over Contempt Plea In PTI Founder’s Case

Mohammad Ali (@ChaudhryMAli88) Published July 21, 2025 | 09:14 PM

The lower court of Islamabad on Monday sought a response from Adiala Jail authorities on a contempt petition for allegedly ignoring court orders related to the PTI founder's access to his sons via WhatsApp call and his medical examination

ISLAMABAD, (UrduPoint / Pakistan Point News - 21st Jul, 2025) The lower court of Islamabad on Monday sought a response from Adiala Jail authorities on a contempt petition for allegedly ignoring court orders related to the PTI founder's access to his sons via WhatsApp call and his medical examination.

Special Judge Central, Shahrukh Arjumand, issued notices to the Adiala Jail officials during the hearing of a contempt of court plea filed by the legal team representing the PTI founder. The court directed the jail administration to submit a reply by July 24.

Lawyers Usman Riaz Gul, Zaheer Abbas, Shaheena Shahab, and others appeared before the court on behalf of the petitioner. They argued that the jail authorities deliberately disregarded the court’s clear directives. The petition states that despite a court order allowing the PTI founder to contact his sons via WhatsApp call, the jail administration did not comply.

The petition further claimed that the authorities also failed to conduct the court-ordered medical examination of the PTI founder.

According to the petitioners, the jail administration’s actions fall under violations outlined in Sections 188 and 177 of the Pakistan Penal Code, which address disobedience to an order of a public servant and providing false information, respectively.

The lawyers contended that the Superintendent of Adiala Jail not only ignored the court orders but also undermined the authority of the judiciary by making independent decisions without legal justification. They requested the court to take legal action against the officials responsible for non-compliance.

The petition also emphasized that the delay in implementing the court’s orders amounts to a clear refusal rather than mere negligence. After hearing the arguments, the court issued notices to the jail authorities for a response and adjourned the hearing until July 24.