PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) sought a detailed report from the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government on Thursday. The court is questioning the decision to rename the historic Arbab Niaz Cricket Stadium after PTI founder Imran Khan.
A two-member bench heard the petition. Justice Syed Arshad Ali and Justice Sadiq Ali Momand presided over the proceedings. During the session, the Additional Advocate General (AAG) appeared for the state. Advocate Ali Gohar Durrani represented the petitioner.
Legal Violations and Administrative Guidelines
Advocate Ali Gohar Durrani informed the court that the provincial cabinet approved the renaming on February 21, 2025. This stadium sits in Shahi Bagh. He argued that the move violates KP Administration Department guidelines. These regulations state that the government cannot name public assets after a living person.
Justice Syed Arshad Ali noted that previous judgments from the Peshawar and Balochistan High Courts support this rule. He asked if the counsel had seen the judgment of Justice (R) Qazi Faez Isa on this matter. The justice suggested that the government should construct a new stadium if they wish to honor someone.
Historical Significance of Arbab Niaz Stadium
The petitioner’s counsel highlighted the legacy of the venue. Workers originally built it in 1984 as the “Shahi Bagh Cricket Stadium.” The government later renamed it Arbab Niaz Stadium in 1987. Under the KP Local Council Rules 1994, authorities cannot change a name for 50 years once they establish it.
The counsel also mentioned an intriguing detail regarding the PTI founder. He stated that Imran Khan has reportedly expressed displeasure over the decision to use his name for the facility.
The Decline of International Cricket
The court learned that Arbab Niaz Stadium remains the only international cricket ground in KP. The venue hosted 15 One Day Internationals (ODIs) and 6 Test matches between 1984 and 2006. However, international cricket stopped there after February 2006 following a match between Pakistan and India.
Renovation work began in 2017 to meet international standards. The counsel pointed out that the government changed the name immediately after the completion of these repairs.
The AAG requested more time to submit a formal response. The court granted this request and directed the government to file the report before the next hearing.
