CB withdraws Shah's Jan 13-16 orders

AGP say govt to challenge regular bench's contempt order

Listen to article

ISLAMABAD:

A constitutional bench (CB) of the Supreme Court has withdrawn the January 13 and January 16 orders passed by a regular bench with regard to clarification about the jurisdiction of SC's regular and constitutional benches during hearing of a bunch of cases challenging vires of the Custom Act, 1969.

On Tuesday, a seven-member CB led by Justice Aminuddin Khan resumed hearing the cases which were earlier placed before a three-member regular bench headed by Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.

However, on January 17, the Supreme Court committee that lists cases before benches withdrew the cases from the regular bench and referred them to the CB committee for re-listing.

This irked the regular bench which initiated contempt proceedings against an additional registrar, Nazar Abbas, for violating its order. Later, on January 27, the bench exonerated the official from contempt charges but noted that the SC committees had committed contempt of court.

It also ordered placing the cases once again before the original bench.

However, the seven-member CB to which the case was later listed for hearing withdrew the regular bench's orders dated Jan 13 and Jan 16 on Tuesday.

During the hearing, Attorney-General for Pakistan (AGP) Mansoor Awan said the government has decided to challenge the contempt of court decision by Justice Shah led bench.

"An appeal will be filed against the contempt of court decision issued the previous day, and it has been decided to challenge Justice's orders from January 13 and January 16," he said.

During the hearing, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that Justice Mansoor Ali Shah had ordered the customs duty cases to be placed before his bench. He questioned whether the CB proceedings could continue in the presence of this order.

Justice Jamal Mandokhail questioned the legitimacy of the regular's bench's order in the contempt case.

"This is also a court. Life is unpredictable, but the Supreme Court and other courts will remain. We must take care of our institution. No one should worry; nothing will happen to this institution," he added.

Justice Mazhar expressed surprise, saying that the January 16 order said the case should be "considered heard." He questioned the origin of the term, noting that either a case is heard or it is not. "Where did the expression 'considered heard' come from?" he asked.

AGP Awan said he had two orders from January 13. "One specified the next hearing date as January 27, while the other stated January 16. The hearing date had been altered in the order," he said.

Justice Mazhar further said it was unclear how, without serving the AGP a notice under Rule 27-A, it was stated that the case should be considered heard.

Subsequently, the CB issued an order to attach the record of the Nazar Abbas contempt of court case with the customs duty cases and adjourned the hearing indefinitely.

One member of the bench, Justice Ayesha Malik, recused herself from hearing the case. In a note issued after the hearing, she stated that she would not like to hear these cases in order to "protect and preserve the sanctity of the original proceedings and the judicial order of January 16".