The registrar of the apex court on Monday declared a petition seeking the dissolution of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) party as “not entertainable.”
Awn Chaudhry, formerly a close confidant of PTI chief Imran Khan, had filed the petition in the Supreme Court, alleging that the PTI chairman was involved in attacks on state institutions following his arrest on May 9.
The petition claimed that the PTI, along with its chairman and office-bearers, engaged in unconstitutional acts, including hate speeches targeting the judiciary, defense institutions, and the burning and looting of public assets.
It further alleged that the PTI conspired against state institutions, resulting in the burning of the Lahore corps commander's house and looting of state properties nationwide on May 9.
Read Contempt plea filed against justices Isa and Masood
Requesting the court to disband the former ruling party, the petition argued that the PTI chief and his party had undermined societal fabric by attacking institutions and making disparaging remarks about the country and its institutions.
The petitioner, now associated with the newly formed Istehkam-e-Pakistan Party (IPP), named the PTI chairman, its president, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, Defense Minister Khawaja Asif, and the ministries of law and interior as respondents in the case.
However, the Supreme Court Registrar returned the petition, raising objections to it. The registrar's office stated that the petitioner failed to indicate the specific questions of public importance related to the Constitution that would warrant the Supreme Court's jurisdiction under Article 184(3). It further noted that the petitioner had not sought relief from any other appropriate legal forum, nor provided justification for bypassing such avenues.
Additionally, the registrar's office highlighted that the petitioner did not fulfill the requirements outlined in Rule 14 of Order XXV of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980, regarding the provided certificate. Moreover, it stated that the Prime Minister and the Federal Defense Minister could not be impleaded as parties under Article 248 of the Constitution.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ