LHC CJ forms larger bench over Hamza's oath-taking

PTI had requested formation of larger bench against an LHC order that nominated NA speaker to administer oath

Rana Yasif May 09, 2022
Lahore High Court. PHOTO: LHC.GOV.PK


Lahore High Court (LHC) Chief Justice Muhammad Ameer Bhatti has constituted a larger bench to hear an appeal against an order by the same court that had directed the National Assembly speaker to administer the oath to Chief Minister Hamza Shehbaz.

The bench comprises Justice Sadaqat Ali Khan, Justice Shahid Jamil Khan, Justice Shehram Sarwar, Justice Sajid Mehmood Sethi and Justice Tariq Saleem Sheikh.

The decision to form a five-member bench was taken in response to a petition by the PTI lawmakers that had requested the high court to set aside Justice Jawad Hassan’s verdict for being “illegal as well as beyond the facts of the case”. The plea had also asked to expunge the “rude remarks” passed by Justice Jawad against the constitutional officers such as the governor of Punjab and the president of Pakistan in his judgement.

Read Hamza finally sworn in as Punjab CM

The petition was heard by a division bench headed by Justice Muhammad Sajid Mehmood Sethi and Justice Tariq Saleem Sheikh as its member. The bench on the same day (April 30) referred this matter to the LHC CJ with a recommendation to form a larger bench comprising five or more judges to hear this matter.

The bench had also suspended some observations given by LHC’s single bench Justice Jawad Hassan in his judgement’s para 9.

“Although while passing the judgment this court has enunciated the principles of law having binding effect under Article 201 of the Constitution which have been disregarded not only by the president of Pakistan but also by the governor of Punjab, causing nonfulfillment of his constitutional duty thereby violating Article 5 read with Article 189 and 201 of the Constitution,” the judge had written in the ruling.



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