IHC rejects IB's request to withdraw the objection in court

• Justice Sattar informs that AAG IB's objection application has already been dismissed.
• The court fined Pemra, FIA and PTA for filing applications to challenge the judge.
• The judge summoned DG IB after dismissing three similar pleas on April 29.

ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court on Friday rejected the Intelligence Bureau's request to withdraw its objection against the court's hearing of the audio leak case.

The plea filed by IB just days after imposing fine on three other government agencies over their respective petitions was dismissed by IHC Judge Babar Sattar today.

Earlier this week, the court fined three government agencies Rs 500,000 each while dismissing their respective petitions in the matter.

The fine imposed on the government agency included Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (Pemra), Pakistan Telecommunications Authority (PTA) and Federal Investigation Agency (FIA). The court did not impose a fine on IB at this point, but summoned its joint director general Tariq Mehmood at the next hearing of the case.

Meanwhile, the audio leak case involving former Chief Justice Saqib Nisar's son and Bushra Bibi – wife of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder Imran Khan – will be heard by Justice Sattar after the matter came to light in 2023.

The Deputy Attorney General informed the court that the IB wishes to withdraw its objection against Justice Sattar.

“Your appeal has already been dismissed. When the order dismissing the petition comes, you will receive it,” Justice Sattar said.

The judge indicated that he would impose a contempt of court judgment on DG IB in light of the notice in the court's dismissal order.

“The order also asked who gave the authority to file the petition,” the IHC judge said, telling the AAG that he could respond only after the order was issued.

All the petitioners, including IB, FIA, Pemra and PTA, argued in their pleas that the petitions of Bushra Bibi and former CJP's son Najamul Saqib should be presented to the bench which had decided an identical matter in 2021 and rejected by judge Sattar demanded to avoid a different decision.

The ministries had sought recusal of Justice Sattar after six IHC judges, including him, wrote a letter to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) complaining about intelligence interference in the court's decision.

On March 25, the judges called for a judicial convention to be convened to examine the matter of alleged interference by intelligence officials in judicial functions or “intimidation” of judges in a manner that undermines the independence of the judiciary.