Photo via Dawn

Civilian convicted of offence against state cannot claim fundamental rights, LHC told in Hassaan Niazi case

Read the original at Dawn ↗
Cite

Sheikh, W. A. (2026, November 2). Civilian convicted of offence against state cannot claim fundamental rights, LHC told in Hassaan Niazi case. Dawn. https://www.dawn.com/news/2041613/civilian-convicted-of-offence-against-state-cannot-claim-fundamental-rights-lhc-told-in-hassaan-niazi-case

Dated from the outlet's own feed. Check the original for its byline.

Dawn · collected 2026-11-02 · by Wajih Ahmad Sheikh

Quick Summary

The Punjab government has told the Lahore High Court (LHC) that a civilian convicted of an offense against the state cannot claim fundamental rights protection. This is in response to Barrister Hassaan Khan Niazi’s challenge regarding his handover to military custody for trial related to May 9 riots. The report submitted by the home secretary and inspector general of police argues that every citizen's first duty is loyalty to the state, citing a 2005 LHC judgment. It also states that no judicial order was necessary for Niazi’s transfer because he was an absconder, not in judicial custody or on remand.
Written by AI on 2026-11-02, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

On November 2, 2026, the Punjab government told the Lahore High Court (LHC) that a civilian convicted of an offense against the state cannot claim fundamental rights. This statement was made in response to a petition by Barrister Hassaan Khan Niazi, nephew of PTI founder Imran Khan, who is challenging his handover to the army and subsequent trial related to the May 9 riots. The government cited a 2005 LHC judgment (PLD 2005 LAH 721) stating that loyalty to the state is every citizen’s first duty. The report submitted by the home secretary and inspector general of police argued that Niazi, described as an absconder and convicted prisoner, should not be released through any means other than appeal.

Written for “Hassaan Niazi Case Hearing” on 2026-11-03, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 Hassaan Niazi Case Hearing
Politics · 1 article(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

Nothing to compare against. No article is close enough to this one for the pipeline to have linked or judged the pair.
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
17
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
24%
4 of 17 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
Leans strongly right
of the writing, not the subject · beta estimate
Publisher signals
72/100
Dawn's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
1
Politics
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-11-02 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Dawn · 2601 article(s) · 3 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 3 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Wajih Ahmad Sheikh
36 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 He expressed concern over her health, saying she was an elderly woman and her actual condition could only be ascertained after meeting her.
🔮 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.
🔮 Justice Khan then sought reports from the Punjab Home Department and said he would examine the matter after going through the reports. Among the three detainees, Noreen had been shifted to the Punjab Institute of Cardiology (PIC) following her deteriorating health, on the recommendation of the doctors of the Kot Lakhpat Jail, where she has been detained.
🔮 Justice Khan then sought reports from the Punjab Home Department and said he would examine the matter after going through the reports.
🔮 Justice Khan then sought reports from the Punjab Home Department and said he would examine the matter after going through the reports.
🔮 He further argued that suspending the detention notification would pave the way for the women’s release.
🔮 The judge distinguished between accessibility and service, observing that an order may be accessible without having been served in accordance with the law.
2026-10-30 · mixed framing · IRIS access alone is not legal service, LHC rules
🔮 During a pending appeal before an appellate court, the petitioner had offered in August 2023 to have the matter decided by an oath on the Holy Quran taken by the opposing side, with a condition that the oath-taker’s wife would stand divorced if the oath proved false.
🔮 The chief minister declared that she stood “firmly with the oppressed, regardless of how powerful their oppressors may be”.
🔮 The judge, however, observed that the official could not be summoned as he had not been made a party to the petition.
Also by Wajih Ahmad Sheikh
Nothing else under this byline is closely related to this article, so these are simply their most recent.
All 36 articles by Wajih Ahmad Sheikh →

Topics

LAHORE LHC Punjab the Lahore High Court the Supreme Court’s

Subjects

Niazi PERSON · 8× LAHORE GPE · 2× LHC ORG · 2× the Supreme Court’s ORG · 2× Hafeezullah Khan Niazi PERSON · 1× Hassaan Khan Niazi PERSON · 1× Imran Khan PERSON · 1× PTI ORG · 1× Punjab GPE · 1× the Lahore High Court ORG · 1×

Narrative

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).
framing: mixed · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-11-02
🔮 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.

Claims (17 extracted, 4 hedged)

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. uncertain
who → tell → 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). asserted
duty → submit → judgment
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. asserted
release → describe → appeal
It said no judicial order was required for his handover because Niazi was neither in judicial custody nor on remand. asserted
Niazi → say → 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. asserted
they → state → 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. asserted
report → hand → petition
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. uncertain
ruling → state → petitions
It said Niazi had already filed an appeal under Section 133-B of the Pakistan Army Act, 1952. asserted
Niazi → say → Act
“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. asserted
report → establish → law
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. asserted
which → argue → 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. uncertain
It → accuse → court
The report said Niazi had not annexed the military court’s order, an objection upheld by the high court in two other petitions. asserted
Niazi → say → petitions
It prayed the court to dismiss the petition on the grounds that it was devoid of merit and not maintainable. asserted
it → pray → merit
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. uncertain
Police → accord → Aug
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. asserted
offences → command → martial
Police handed him over under Section 76 of the Army Act, read with Section 549(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. asserted
Police → hand → Procedure
He was later sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment in December 2024. asserted
He → sentence → December
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support