“I had to face imprisonment and house arrests, but it made me tougher”—Asma Jehangir
The concept of retribution has persisted since the time human beings came on this earth. Every person inflicting harm, injury or any other criminal act has to pay for it. This could be in the form of nature taking its own course to teach the offender a lesson or, in the case of human cognisance, as punishment. Humans are not perfect and are therefore bound to make mistakes, but the fact remains that any act performed in bad faith would, sooner or later, definitely not go unaccounted for. Reprimand and censure are common ways in homes and workplaces to make culprits realise their flaws.
Punitive actions can be both mild and serious, ranging from paying a nominal fine for petty lapses to even the death sentence for murder, etc. Governments usually have voluminous, complex and highly detailed penalty codes that are meant to cover a wide range of felonies and are regularly amended to cater for changing socio-economic situations. The justifications behind these provisions are usually the much-harped-upon protection of the public, deterrence from committing acts that have been declared illegal, recovery of financial losses and maintenance of social law and order.
One of the methods applied under these penalty laws is imprisonment, which is akin to suppressing freedom of movement, preventing people from interacting with others and exercising their independence. Sometimes it is used as a tool to protect a person from coming to harm, but that is meant only for the powerful or those whose life is deemed to have some importance. It is also a popular but costly way to punish miscreants as well as under-trial persons.
As per a report of a leading newspaper published in February 2025, “under-trial prisoners account for 73.41 per cent of the total prison population, highlighting systemic inefficiencies such as ineffective bail and parole systems, prolonged judicial delays, and an over-reliance on pre-trial detention”. This accounted for an increase from 2017, when under-trial prisoners made up 66 per cent of the prison population, which was already beyond the global average of 27 per cent at the time. This steadily rising figure should be a cause for concern for a judiciary that seems more inclined towards its own betterment rather than paying attention to these glaring aspects of governance.
History is witness to the fact that when anyone with strong convictions has had to face torture or humiliation, that person often emerges more powerful than before. This is applicable to ordinary people too, who may have gone through life’s tribulations but, as they mature, so do their inner qualities, making them better or worse human beings. Thus, walking on a turbulent path can be either destructive or constructive; in both situations, the principal effect is transformation.
What a far cry from the holy persona of Hazrat Ali (AS), who, despite threats from the Kharijis, did not imprison those who merely spoke against him, but only detained those who actively committed offences against the State
So many stories have emanated from these gallows, a lot of blockbuster films made for the entertainment of people, but above all, innumerable research theses have been conducted academically that provide a sound background to subjects related to, for example, psychology, sociology and criminology. These studies have proved extremely useful in jail reforms, yet adolescents subjected to incarceration sometimes turn into criminals of the worst order. Of course, some have left these prisons highly educated and skilful, and have gone on to make their lives better after their release.
Unfortunately, in the Subcontinent, during the British Raj and even after gaining independence in 1947, prisons have been used to silence dissent and suppress revolt. As a result, the conscious literati became targets; therefore, poets, journalists, story-writers, etc., were hanged on allegations of instigating the public through their intellectual contributions.
Pre-partition figures included Veer Savarkar, Gangadhar Tilak, Faiz Ahmed Faiz (post-partition as well), Sajjad Zaheer, Hasrat Mohani, Maulvi Baqar, Vatsyayan, Ali Sardar Jafri, Josh Malihabadi, Chander Chatterjee and Saadat Hassan Manto.
Post-independence, notable personalities include Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, Mir Sir Ahmad Yar Khan, Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy and Habib Jalib—the list, of course, is not exhaustive, merely indicative. They were accused of sedition, challenging the social and political status quo and provoking rebellion.
In short, fascist and colonial-minded regimes are not scared of politicians or bureaucrats; the majority among them are easily pliable. They are terrified of intellectuals. Anyone who has the capacity to transform public opinion is imprisoned in a quest to transform his or her ideals.
On 23 January 2026, according to a news report, Imaan Zainab Mazari and her husband, Hadi Ali Chattha, both lawyers and human rights activists, were arrested after allegedly being manhandled. Earlier, Additional District and Sessions Judge (ADSJ) Mohammad Afzal Majoka cancelled their bail on 15 January 2026, issuing their arrest warrants on 16 January 2026.
They were going to surrender before Majoka’s court after obtaining protective bail from the Islamabad High Court, but were arrested in some other case, the First Information Report of which was never disclosed to them or to the court. After their arrest, Judge Majoka sentenced both to a total of 17 years’ rigorous imprisonment and a hefty fine on multiple charges in a case relating to controversial social media posts.
Responsibility for the repercussions of these arrests is bound to fall on members of the Executive and Judiciary who have acted hurriedly and with impunity. Socrates, too, had to drink poison, and all such thinkers and activists are forced to face persecution. The question is, where almost 65 per cent of prisoners are rotting in jail for years awaiting their trial, did these two lawyers appear, such hardened criminals that their trial was speedily taken up and they were sentenced with equal alacrity?
Those who possess and demonstrate the ability to influence minds, challenge authority and question legitimacy have to face the wrath, even if it amounts to a flagrant violation of due process of law under Article 4 and a denial of the fundamental right to a fair trial guaranteed under Article 10A of the country’s Constitution.
What a far cry from the holy persona of Hazrat Ali (AS), who, despite threats from the Kharijis, did not imprison those who merely spoke against him, but only detained those who actively committed offences against the State.