Govt calls SC order on Imran Khan’s hospital transfer beyond legal authority
The federal government has filed a review petition against the Supreme Court’s interim order concerning Imran Khan hospital transfer.
In its petition, the government argued that the court’s order went beyond its legal authority. It said existing prison rules already provide a procedure for treating prisoners who need medical care.
Government objects to private hospital treatment
According to the petition, prisoners can be moved to government civil hospitals or district headquarters hospitals when necessary. However, the government said there is no clear provision for shifting a prisoner to a private hospital.
The government also argued that prison laws do not give inmates the right to receive treatment from doctors of their personal choice.
The petition questioned the basis of the decision related to Imran Khan health. The government claimed that the medical report did not clearly show that his condition had worsened.
It also said a medical board had examined Imran Khan several times and argued that expert medical opinions should have been considered before ordering Imran Khan hospital transfer.
Four requests granted at interim stage
The government further objected to the use of Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the case.
It said the provision should not be used to interfere in the administrative matters of jail authorities.
According to the petition, four requests were granted at the interim stage. They included shifting Imran Khan to Shifa International Hospital, allowing his personal doctors to examine him, permitting family meetings and providing medical reports to his lawyer.
Read Also: Imran Khan may avoid army clash if freed, close aide says
The government said granting these requests at the interim stage effectively provided final relief before the case had been fully decided.
Concern over treatment of other prisoners
The government also warned that allowing special treatment at a private hospital could create a precedent for other prisoners.
It argued that other inmates could make similar demands, creating additional challenges for prison authorities.
The government said equal treatment of prisoners should be maintained and that special arrangements should not create a separate standard for one inmate.
