SC to decide ex-IHC judge’s case after listening to respondents

Apex court stresses need to decide cases according to law

Our Correspondent December 09, 2020


The Supreme Court on Wednesday observed that the most important thing in deciding cases was that the judgments were made according to the law and that the verdict in former Islamabad High Court (IHC) judge Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui case would be given after listening to the respondents.

On July 31, 2018 the Supreme Judicial Council had issued a show-cause notice to Justice Siddiqui on a reference for making unnecessary and unwarranted comments at the Rawalpindi District Bar Association by accusing the establishment of manipulating the judicial proceedings. He was removed as judge of the IHC in October 2018.

On Wednesday, a five-member larger bench of the top court headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial heard the appeals against the removal of Justice Siddiqui.

During the proceedings, Advocate Rasheed Rizvi stated that Karachi, Islamabad and Rawalpindi bars had also filed appeals in the case.

The lawyer said neither their pleas were fixed for hearing nor were they informed about the objections raised on them.

Rizvi said he himself went to the additional registrar to obtain a copy of the objections but the official was unable to find it.

Justice Bandial observed that objections had been raised on the use of “scandalised” words in the applications of the bars.

He asked Rizvi to rectify the application on his own saying that the counsel was aware of the law and conventions.

Another lawyer Salahuddin pointed out that the Islamabad bar application was submitted after rectification but it had still not been fixed for hearing.

Counsel Hamid Khan prayed the court to fix the case for next week to which Justice Bandial replied that the routine work of the court was affected due to high-profile cases.

The judge observed it was most important that the judgments made were correct and according to the law.

The court said decision in Justice Siddiqui case would be made after listening to the respondents.

Lawyer Hamid Khan pointed out that the petitioner was retiring in June next year.

The court directed that the case be fixed for hearing in January and the pleas with objections according to the law.


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