The Supreme Court has intervened after a bombshell report revealed Imran Khan has lost 85% of his vision in his right eye. Allegations of medical negligence in Adiala Jail have triggered the formation of an emergency medical board and a court-ordered family reunion.

Pakistan’s Supreme Court has ordered an emergency medical board to examine Imran Khan following reports that the former Prime Minister retains only 15% vision in his right eye. The crisis, linked to a retinal vein occlusion, has sparked nationwide concerns over "state-sponsored negligence" and solitary confinement conditions.

A Race Against Permanent Darkness

The political landscape of Pakistan shifted today, not because of a rally or a vote, but because of a medical report. Salman Safdar, acting as amicus curiae (friend of the court), submitted a harrowing seven-page document to a two-member bench led by Chief Justice Yahya Afridi. The core of the report is a stark admission from the PTI founder: his right eye is failing.

Khan, who reportedly held "6x6 normal vision" as recently as October 2025, began experiencing "blurred and hazy" vision shortly thereafter. What followed was a series of events that Safdar describes as a "grave and inexcusable act of negligence." Despite repeated complaints to the then-jail superintendent, no specialist was summoned for months. By the time an ophthalmologist from the Pakistan Institute of Medical Sciences (PIMS) was called, the damage—a blood clot leading to Central Retinal Vein Occlusion (CRVO)—had already taken its toll.

The Health Timeline

  • October 2025: Khan reports normal 6x6 vision in both eyes.

  • November 2025: Persistent blurring begins; complaints are allegedly ignored by jail authorities.

  • January 16, 2026: Jail Superintendent Abdul Ghafoor Anjum is replaced by Sajid Baig amidst the brewing health crisis.

  • January 24, 2026: A "secretive" late-night procedure is performed at PIMS, where an anti-VEGF injection is administered.

  • February 12, 2026: Supreme Court orders an independent medical board to assess the remaining 15% vision.

The Pathology of CRVO

In my analysis of the clinical documents referenced in the Supreme Court, the diagnosis of Right Central Retinal Vein Occlusion is not just a medical term; it is a ticking clock. In a high-stress, solitary confinement environment, vascular health is notoriously difficult to manage.

CRVO occurs when the main vein that drains blood from the retina becomes blocked. Think of it as a localized stroke in the eye. When blood cannot flow out, it leaks into the retina, causing swelling (macular edema) and hemorrhaging. The fact that Khan describes his vision as only 15% suggests that the "ischemic" form of this condition—where blood flow is completely cut off—may have set in.

While the PIMS medical team administered an intravitreal injection (likely Lucentis or Avastin) on January 24, the "friend of the court" report suggests this was "too little, too late." The delay in treatment is the pivot point where medical science meets political controversy.

From an institutional standpoint, the Supreme Court’s intervention is a significant assertion of judicial oversight. Chief Justice Yahya Afridi’s remark—"The issue of Imran's health is most important; intervention is necessary"—signals a departure from the previous hands-off approach regarding jail conditions.

For the state, the stakes are equally high. Attorney General Mansoor Usman Awan affirmed that providing healthcare is the "state’s responsibility." However, the optics of a former world-class athlete and national leader losing his sight in a high-security cell are disastrous for Pakistan’s international standing. This isn't just about a medical board; it's about the fundamental rights of a high-profile prisoner under the Constitution.

Health as a Political Weapon

In Pakistan, the health of incarcerated leaders has historically been a precursor to major political shifts.

  1. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto: His deteriorating health in Rawalpindi Jail (1979) became a focal point for international pleas for clemency.

  2. Nawaz Sharif: In 2019, a "platelet count crisis" led to his temporary release and eventual exile to London for medical treatment.

  3. Imran Khan (2026): Unlike his predecessors, Khan has remained in solitary confinement for over two years. The vision loss adds a layer of "physical deterioration" that his legal team argues is a direct result of his confinement conditions.

The Atmosphere at the Supreme Court

The mood outside the courtroom today was electric. When Salman Akram Raja and Aleema Khanum emerged to address the press, the rhetoric was no longer about "lawsuits" but about "crimes." The naming of specific jail officials, like Abdul Ghafoor Anjum, suggests the PTI is moving toward a strategy of individual accountability for what they term "custodial neglect."

What struck me most was the court’s decision to allow Khan to speak to his sons in the UK via phone before February 16. This "humanitarian pivot" by the bench suggests they recognize the psychological toll of the vision loss. It is an olive branch in a legal battle that has otherwise been characterized by iron-fisted restrictions.

Medical Board and Legal Fallout

The Supreme Court has set a hard deadline: February 16, 2026. Before this date, a specialized medical board must provide a definitive assessment. The court rejected the PTI’s request to have family members present during the exam, but the demand for "independent physicians" remains a point of contention.

If the board confirms that the vision loss is irreversible due to a lack of timely care, we could see a massive escalation in legal petitions for "house arrest" or transfer to a private hospital. For now, the "Captain" of Pakistan’s 1992 World Cup victory is fighting his most difficult battle yet—not for power, but for the ability to see.

 In a landscape where legal battles and political shifts are the norm, does the state’s duty to provide medical care to a high-profile prisoner outweigh the security constraints of a high-security cell, or has the line between incarceration and "custodial neglect" been permanently crossed in this case? If the independent medical board confirms that this 85% vision loss was preventable, how should the judicial system hold specific officials accountable to ensure that basic human rights remain intact for every citizen, regardless of their political standing?



Disclaimer:  This article is intended for informational and analytical purposes, drawing from ongoing legal proceedings and public court filings. While it synthesizes medical terminology and reports submitted to the Supreme Court of Pakistan, it does not constitute professional medical advice or a formal legal opinion. The situation regarding the PTI founder’s health and the subsequent judicial orders is rapidly evolving; as such, readers should look to official court transcripts and verified medical bulletins for the most current and authoritative updates on the case.