LAHORE: The Punjab government on Monday told the Lahore High Court (LHC) that a civilian who commits an offence against the state and is convicted cannot claim the protection of fundamental rights, while seeking the dismissal of a petition filed by Barrister Hassaan Khan Niazi, nephew of PTI founder Imran Khan, challenging his handover to the army and subsequent trial in a case related to the May 9 riots.
In a report submitted after almost a year on behalf of the provincial government through the home secretary and the inspector general of police, the deputy inspector general of police (legal) said every citizen’s first duty was loyalty to the state, citing a 2005 LHC judgment (PLD 2005 LAH 721).
The report described Niazi as a convicted prisoner, arguing that his release through a second round of litigation, other than by way of appeal, was not permissible.
It said no judicial order was required for his handover because Niazi was neither in judicial custody nor on remand.
The report further stated that he was an absconder, unlike the 16 co-accused whose transfer had been sought from an anti-terrorism court while they were in jail.
The Sarwar Road station house officer neither handed over Niazi’s custody nor received a letter from the commanding officer, the report added.
“That was done by the investigation in-charge of the Sarwar Road police station, who is not a party to the petition,” the report claimed.
It stated that the Supreme Court’s May 7, 2025, ruling on the intra-court appeals upheld military trials while granting the accused the right to appeal, but not the right to file constitutional petitions.
It said Niazi had already filed an appeal under Section 133-B of the Pakistan Army Act, 1952.
“It is a well-established principle that the same question of law cannot be challenged in two different forums simultaneously; therefore, this petition lacks maintainability in the eyes of the law,” the report maintained.
It further argued that Niazi had misread the Supreme Court’s short order, which applied only to petitions pending or filed against anti-terrorism court orders.
It accused him of concealing facts about his appeal, his father Hafeezullah Khan Niazi’s earlier proceedings, including a petition before the apex court and a contempt petition, as well as the anti-terrorism court’s May 25, 2023, order.
The report said Niazi had not annexed the military court’s order, an objection upheld by the high court in two other petitions.
It prayed the court to dismiss the petition on the grounds that it was devoid of merit and not maintainable.
According to the report, Niazi was a proclaimed offender in FIR No. 96/2023, registered on May 10, 2023, at the Sarwar Road police station in Lahore Cantonment in connection with an attack on Jinnah House, which was also the residence of the Lahore Corps commander.
Police arrested Niazi in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa on Aug 16, 2023. The next day, the commanding officer of the 54 Electrical and Mechanical Engineers Battalion, Lahore, asked for his custody, saying his alleged offences fell under the Official Secrets Act, 1923 and the Pakistan Army Act, 1952 and were triable by court-martial.
Police handed him over under Section 76 of the Army Act, read with Section 549(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He was later sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment in December 2024.
Defence ministry’s reply
The defence ministry told the LHC that Niazi went to Jinnah House on May 9, 2023, where he made videos and passed sarcastic remarks about the Corps Commander’s uniform.
“The incident impacted the image of Pakistan and was prejudicial to the safety and interest of the state,” said a reply signed by an assistant judge advocate general, the army’s legal branch at Headquarters 4 Corps, and filed through an additional attorney general.
The reply said that Niazi, held at Kot Lakhpat Jail, was convicted by a Field General Court Martial (FGCM) and sentenced to 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment under Section 3 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923, read with Section 59 of the Army Act.
It argued that the petition was barred by Articles 199(3) and 8(3) of the Constitution, xcludes matters related to the proceedings of the armed forces personnel from the purview of the high courts, and that Niazi already had an appeal pending under Section 133-B of the Army Act before the army court of appeals.
It said the SC’s May 7, 2025 short order restored Sections 2(1)(d) and 59(4) of the Army Act without striking down Section 133-B.
The direction that high courts decide petitions “on their own merits”, the reply said, is not a blanket exemption from the constitutional bar. It said Niazi was tried with a counsel of his choice and made a judicial confession before a magistrate that he did not retract at trial.
It said the trial ended on Jan 5, 2024 and he was admitted to Lahore’s Central Jail on Dec 26, 2024. It also argued that he had waited nearly two years before coming to court.
The defence ministry’s reply pointed out that Niazi was taken into military custody under Section 549(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
It denied discrimination under Article 25, saying that protesters involved in ordinary disruption were tried by the antiterrorism courts, whereas Niazi’s alleged offence involved a prohibited military installation.
A joint trial with the ordinary accused was legally impossible, it said, adding that no Official Secrets Act case had gone to an ordinary court so far.
It added that weekly phone calls and meetings with Niazi’s family were arranged after the handover.
The ministry asked the court to dismiss the petition as premature, not maintainable and without merit, pleading that the Constitution barred the high court from hearing cases involving persons subject to the Pakistan Army Act, 1952.
