+92 300 859 4219 , +92 300 859 1434 
Cash On Delivery is Available
The courtroom additionally hinted that contempt of courtroom proceedings might also be initiated towards the authorities of the stated departments which embody Pakistan Digital Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA), Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) and Federal Investigation Company (FIA).
The separate petitions had been filed by the three aforementioned departments in addition to the Intelligence Bureau, whose Joint Director Normal Tariq Mehmood has been summoned by the courtroom on the following listening to of the case.
At the very least 4 authorities departments filed separate purposes with the IHC within the audio leaks case to request that the matter be positioned earlier than the identical bench of the courtroom that has already determined an analogous subject.
The candidates stated that the petitions of Bushra Bibi, Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf founder Imran Khan’s spouse, and former chief justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar’s son Najamul Saqib must also be positioned earlier than the bench that had determined an an identical matter in 2021, requesting recusal of Justice Babar Sattar to keep away from any differing resolution.
Justice Sattar had been listening to the aforementioned petitions after the matter surfaced in 2023.
Within the case being heard by Justice Sattar, the federal government departments argued within the pleas, that an an identical matter was beforehand determined by Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani in 2021. Subsequently, they requested the choose’s recusal within the case to keep away from a conflicting resolution in addition to within the curiosity of justice.
The departments are searching for Justice Sattar’s recusal after a letter by six IHC judges, which additionally consists of him, was written to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), complaining concerning the interference of intelligence companies within the courtroom’s resolution.
The judges, on March 25, demanded to convene the judicial conference to think about the matter of alleged interference of intelligence operatives within the judicial features or “intimidation” of judges in a way that undermined the independence of the judiciary.
