Imran Khan’s Sister Files Contempt Plea Over Hospital Transfer
ISLAMABAD: Uzma Khan, sister of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf founder and former prime minister Imran Khan, has moved the Supreme Court seeking contempt proceedings against Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and several senior officials. Her petition alleges that the authorities failed to comply with the court’s August 18 directions concerning Imran Khan’s transfer to Shifa International Hospital for a medical examination, escalating a dispute over how the judicial order was implemented.
The petition was filed through advocate Uzair Karamat Bhandari under constitutional provisions and the laws governing contempt proceedings. Those named as respondents include Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar, Information Minister Attaullah Tarar, Islamabad Chief Commissioner Sohail Ashraf, Interior Secretary Ahmed Raza Sarwar, Punjab Inspector General of Prisons Mian Salik Jalal and Adiala Jail Superintendent Sajid Baig.
Uzma has asked the Supreme Court to issue notices to the respondents and require their personal appearance while examining whether contempt has occurred. She has also requested measures to secure implementation of the August 18 order, including the possible appointment of a court officer or local commission to oversee Imran Khan’s transfer to Shifa International Hospital for the medical examination specified in the earlier directions. The allegations remain before the court and no finding of contempt has been made.
The petition argues that Uzma has standing to approach the court because the August 18 order expressly allowed Imran Khan or members of his family to raise grievances about its implementation. It further alleges that Imran Khan could not initiate the proceedings himself because Adiala Jail authorities did not permit him to complete the necessary authorisation for his counsel. That claim is part of the petitioner’s case and will be subject to judicial consideration if the court takes up the matter.
The dispute intensified after the government took Imran Khan to the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences in Islamabad for a medical check-up during the early hours of Friday rather than transferring him to Shifa International Hospital. He was subsequently returned to Adiala Jail. Security concerns were cited in connection with the arrangements, but Uzma’s petition maintains that using a different hospital did not satisfy the specific terms of the Supreme Court’s order.
Her application also argues that the government’s filing of a review petition did not automatically suspend the August 18 directions. According to the petitioner, any concern about security, clarification or modification should have been placed before the Supreme Court instead of being addressed through a different implementation arrangement. She has therefore asked the court both to enforce its previous directions and to determine whether the conduct of the named officials warrants contempt action.
The government disputes the allegation that it ignored the court. Information Minister Attaullah Tarar said the administration had fully implemented the Supreme Court’s directions, noting that Imran Khan underwent a medical examination and that his sister was present. Tarar accused PTI of politicising the former prime minister’s health and said security concerns had arisen around Shifa International Hospital. He also maintained that the government had not prevented Imran Khan from receiving treatment and would continue providing medical care when required.
The next significant step will depend on how the Supreme Court responds to the contempt petition, including whether it issues notices, seeks formal replies from the respondents or orders additional measures regarding the hospital transfer. The case carries wider political and institutional significance in Pakistan because it involves a jailed former prime minister, senior members of the federal government and an allegation that an order of the country’s highest court was not followed as directed. Until the court rules on those competing positions, the question of legal compliance remains contested.