SC wraps up Lal Masjid suo motu case

Govt provides assurance of awarding land for Hafsa University

Our Correspondent May 02, 2019
Supreme Court. PHOTO: AFP/FILE

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday wrapped up the Lal Masjid suo motu case after government’s assurance of awarding land for Jamia Hafsa, Express News reported.

A two-member bench led by Justice Gulzar Ahmed conducted the hearing and wrapped up the case after the government assured it would award land for the construction of the varsity.

The Attorney General (AG) submitting a sealed report pertaining to Lal Masjid and Hafsa varsity stating the report was sealed owing to the sensitivity of the issue. Justice Yahya Afridi replied that parties have a right to see the report and there exists no law for submission of sealed reports.

Justice Gulzar asked if the plot would be awarded to the varsity to which the AG replied that a 200-yard plot for construction of the varsity will be awarded. According to the previous SC order, Jamia Hafsa will be a state-owned entity.

Justice Gulzar stated the top court would only be dealing with the issue of the plot. "We will not get into any new issue, the rest should be known to the government," he added.

SC seeks report on disputed Jamia Hafsa land

Justice Yahya added that the court will not intervene in policy matters. Justice Gulzar said that the seminary to be constructed on state property will also be owned by the state.

"The state will have control over it since it is giving the plot. There is no purpose of the case after construction and land have been ensured,” Justice Gulzar told the court and wrapped up the case.

The counsel of Lal Masjid argued that there are several issues in the case due to which it cannot be wrapped up.

"The case was not for a plot only. There is an issue of blood money too," counsel stated to which Justice Gulzar replied that the session court would be responsible for these issues.


Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ


Most Read