• Adiala admin given three weeks to furnish data• Salman Akram Raja claims PTI founder kept in solitary confinement, suffering from eye ailment ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Adiala jail administration to submit within three weeks a report detailing the meetings between incarcerated PTI founder Imran Khan and his family members, lawyers, and friends. The order was passed by a three-member bench headed by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar while hearing a set of contempt of court petitions filed by PTI’s Secretary General Salman Akram Raja and others challenging the Oct 23, 2025 Islamabad High Court (IHC) order. The IHC had rejected a contempt petition to seek enforcement of the high court’s directives on visitation rights enjoyed by the PTI founder. During the hearing, the bench ord­e­red the Adiala administration to furnish the report containing complete details of meetings between the PTI founder and the visitors during his almost three-year-long stay in jail. At the outset of the hearing, Islam­abad Advocate General Naveed Mal­ik contended that a comprehensive report would be furnished before the court, for which he sought time. On the other hand, Punjab Addit­ional Advocate General Waseem Mumtaz Malik objected to the admissibility of the petitions, saying that an appeal could not be filed against the consensus order issued by the Islamabad High Court (IHC) after the consent of the parties. Justice Mazhar inquired about the number and date of the meetings, observing that a comprehensive report with these details should be submitted to the court. Justice Mazhar recalled that the IHC was given assurance that media talks would not be conducted outside the jail, wondering whether such an assurance was adhered to by the PTI. At this, PTI lawyer Salman Akram Raja said the IHC order was not unanimous. If the order was not unanimous, the counsel should have filed a revision application before the high court, Justice Mazhar observed. Justice Musarrat Hilali, also a member of the bench, observed that if he had any objection to the high court order, he should have filed a review. Raja said the Supreme Court should call for an up-to-date report on the meetings, adding the PTI founder had been kept in solitary confinement and was suffering from an eye ailment. He recalled that he was present in the Islamabad High Court and had assured the bench during the proceedings that there would be no media talk outside the jail. He, however, hastened to add that his opinion could not be applied to others since no other lawyer was present in the courtroom on that day. The court adjourned the hearing for three weeks, seeking a written response. Meanwhile, Salman Akram Raja in the petition had contended that the IHC, while disposing of his contempt petition, relied solely on oral assertion of the Adiala superintendent regarding alleged compliance with previous judicial directions. The appeal pleaded that the high court failed to call for the relevant record about the implementation of its earlier directions to the jail administration for regular meetings with Imran Khan at the Adiala jail. This constitutes a miscarriage of justice and a failure to exercise constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution, the petition contended. The petition had pleaded that IHC failed to appreciate that its own previous judgement of March 24, 2025, had conferred a clear and unambiguous direction regarding visitation rights of the PTI founding chairman with his legal team and nominated coordinators, and that executive authorities were legally bound to comply with judicial orders unless modified or set aside by a superior forum. The petition said the high court, while disposing of the matter on administrative grounds, failed to safeguard these fundamental and inviolable rights. Published in Dawn, July 21st, 2026