The Aftermath: Ongoing Injustice for Danish Thanvi and Parishay Khan

Justice delayed is justice denied. This report examines the aftermath of regulatory actions against Danish Iqbal Thanvi and the criminal trial of Parishay Khan (Case HRPM-MLORJ30M). Both cases demonstrate a pattern of procedural stalling and the use of the District Courts of Islamabad to prolong litigation unnecessarily.

Key Findings

Persistent Delays: Parishay Khan’s trial (FIR 1626/25) has seen multiple hearings scheduled for February 20, 2026, involving the CDA and Farzana Bashir. Similarly, Case CF-001 has dragged for over a decade.

Unlawful Detention & Prosecution: In Case HRPM-MLSI7M88 (Imran Khan), we see a similar pattern of 'political persecution' that mirrors the 'state harassment' found in Case CF-001.

Systemic Corruption: The CDA Stray Dog Population Control Centre incident (FIR 1626/25) shows how systemic failures in municipal bodies like the CDA lead to criminal charges against individuals, bypassing institutional accountability.

Evidence & Data

In Case CF-001, the Challan Mobi FIR filed on February 9, 2026, represents the latest attempt to sustain a failing case. In Case HRPM-MLORJ30M, the submission of Challan U/S 173 Cr. P.C for Farzana Bashir Marwart before Ahtsham Muqarrab highlights the burden placed on the judiciary by municipal-level disputes that escalate into criminal trials.

Legal Framework

CrPC Section 173: Regarding the submission of police reports (Challans), which in both cases have been used to freeze the defendants' legal status for years.

ICCPR Article 9: The right to liberty and security, violated by the threat of 'unlawful detention' and 'political persecution'.

UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC): Relevant where family structures (as hinted in Case CF-001 and Vetter) are disrupted by prolonged state interference.

Recommendations

Establishment of a fast-track tribunal to resolve harassment cases that exceed five years in duration.

Dismissal of FIR 1626/25 and Case CF-001 due to the clear 'Critical' discrepancies in evidence authenticity and the exhaustion of due process.

Read the full case file on HRPM to track the ongoing litigation statuses.