National

Prices of several essential commodities have increased significantly across Pakistan over the past year, putting additional pressure on household budgets. According to the latest data released by the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (PBS), major increases were recorded in the prices of several food items and fuel products. Onion prices recorded the highest increase among the commodities listed by the statistics agency. The price of onions rose by 132.52% in one year. Tomato prices also increased sharply by 93.21%, while flour became 62.25% more expensive during the same period. Fuel prices also witnessed substantial increases. According to the PBS, LPG became 51.69% more expensive over the year. Diesel prices increased by 33.08%, while petrol became 27.65% more expensive. The rise in fuel prices can also affect transportation and the cost of goods and services. Several meat and fruit prices also increased during the year. The price of bananas rose by 17.66%, while mutton became 15.98% more expensive. Beef prices increased by 13.54%, adding to the cost of commonly consumed food items. However, some essential commodities became cheaper during the same period. Potato prices declined by 30%, while sugar became 19.10% cheaper. Chicken prices also decreased by 17.68%, providing some relief to consumers. The statistics also showed a decline in the prices of eggs and pulses. Egg prices fell by 17.41% over the year, while chana dal became more than 13% cheaper. Masoor dal prices declined by 12.29%, while jaggery became 6% cheaper. The latest figures show mixed price trends in the country. While consumers received some relief from lower prices of potatoes, sugar, chicken, eggs and pulses, sharp increases in onions, tomatoes, flour and fuel continued to add pressure to household expenses. The data highlights the significant changes in the prices of everyday necessities over the past year.

Three drug-related cases involving accused Anmol Pinky came under discussion before the Judicial Magistrate South court, where the prosecution raised objections over deficiencies in the police challans. Police had submitted interim charge sheets in all three cases to the prosecution for review. However, the Deputy District Public Prosecutor found several important details missing from the documents and returned them to the police with instructions to make the required corrections. The prosecution pointed out that the interim challans did not contain any mention of proceedings to declare Anmol Pinky a proclaimed offender. The prosecutor directed police to provide complete details of the legal proceedings related to her status and incorporate them into the revised challans. Another objection concerned accused persons who had already been acquitted in the cases. According to the prosecution, the police challans failed to provide details about those acquittals. The police were therefore instructed to attach copies of the relevant acquittal orders to the case records so that the challans contain complete information about all accused persons and the outcome of proceedings against them. The prosecutor directed the investigating authorities to address all the objections before resubmitting the documents. The revised interim challans will be presented to the prosecution after the required amendments and additional records have been included. The development comes as legal proceedings continue in the three drug cases against Anmol Pinky. The prosecution’s objections mean that the interim challans have not yet been accepted in their submitted form and must first be corrected according to the instructions issued by the prosecutor.

The federal government has approved the deployment of three companies of the Pakistan Army in Rawalpindi. The troops will perform sensitive security duties in the city. The deployment will remain in place for six months. The decision was taken after a request from the Punjab Home Department. The Interior Ministry issued the deployment order on August 21. The order said the army personnel would help prevent any undesirable situation. They will also assist the civil administration in dealing with any unexpected security challenge. The deployment has been authorised under Article 245 of the Constitution. The provision allows the armed forces to assist the civil administration when required. The troops will perform their duties according to the requirements of the district administration. Their presence is intended to strengthen security arrangements and improve the authorities’ ability to respond to emergencies. The government has given the deployment immediate effect. The three army companies can therefore begin their assigned security responsibilities without delay. The order did not provide details about the exact locations where the troops will be stationed. It also did not specify particular operations or threats that prompted the deployment. The decision places additional security resources at the disposal of the Rawalpindi administration. Civil authorities can seek the assistance of the deployed personnel when required during the six-month period. The deployment is part of the government’s broader security arrangements. The use of military personnel under Article 245 is intended to support civilian authorities while they carry out their responsibilities.

Eight members of the Pakistan Bar Council have criticised the federal government over what they described as a deliberate failure to comply with the Supreme Court’s order regarding the medical treatment of PTI founder Imran Khan. In a joint statement issued on Saturday, the lawyers said the Supreme Court’s August 18 directive was clear and binding. They alleged that the executive had disregarded the order by not transferring Imran Khan to Shifa International Hospital as directed. The statement was signed by PBC members including PTI Secretary General Salman Akram Raja, Abid Shahid Zuberi, Muhammad Maqsood Buttar, Shafqat Mehmood Chauhan, Munir Ahmed Kakar, Abdul Sattar Khan, Salahuddin Ahmed and Qazi Muhammad Arshad. The members argued that the executive does not have the authority to ignore a binding judicial order. They said such conduct could undermine the authority of the judiciary, weaken the rule of law and damage the constitutional system of checks and balances. They also expressed concern that ignoring a court order could put fundamental rights at risk. According to the statement, judicial orders provide an important constitutional safeguard against arbitrary actions by state institutions. The lawyers further pointed out that the Supreme Court had already addressed the consequences of non-compliance in its August 18 order. They maintained that the government was aware of its obligations under the ruling. The PBC members also rejected the argument that filing a review petition could suspend the Supreme Court’s directive. They said a review petition does not automatically stop the implementation of an existing court order. They called for those responsible for the alleged violation to be identified and for appropriate legal proceedings to be initiated against them. The statement also raised questions about the impact of recent constitutional amendments on the judiciary and the rule of law. The lawyers argued that no constitutional amendment, political consideration or executive decision could provide legal protection for ignoring a binding Supreme Court order. They further questioned whether the constitutional rights to life, health, dignity and medical treatment were being applied equally to political leaders. The controversy follows the Supreme Court’s August 18 interim order directing authorities to transfer Imran Khan to Shifa International Hospital within two days. The court had ordered his examination and treatment by a multidisciplinary medical board. The bench, headed by Justice Shahid Waheed and comprising Justice Naeem Akhtar Afghan and Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim, was hearing petitions seeking hospitalisation, access to personal doctors and family members, and access to Imran’s medical records. The court had also directed that Dr Uzma Khan and Dr Faisal Sultan, Imran’s personal physician, be present during the medical examination. The government subsequently challenged the hospital-transfer order through a review petition. However, the Supreme Court returned the petition after raising objections over the preparation of the documents and the accompanying paper book. Security arrangements were later made around Shifa International Hospital, creating expectations that Imran would be shifted there. However, authorities subsequently took him to the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences for a medical examination before returning him to prison. Information Minister Attaullah Tarar said the decision was linked to security concerns allegedly created by PTI workers near the hospital. The Pims administration later said specialists from Shifa International Hospital had participated in Imran’s eye assessment, while other examinations were conducted by Pims specialists. The medical issue has been under discussion since Imran was diagnosed with right central retinal vein occlusion, an eye condition, earlier this year.