What's new

Pakistan Supreme Court updates

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Supreme Court wants stronger, brave NAB


Fake bank accounts case, Justice Bandial says court not satisfied with performance of watchdog, Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi says NAB did not have power to act on its own | Why NAB gave time to main accused till February 15, asks Justice Sajjad Ali Shah
Supreme Court wants stronger, brave NAB

https://nation.com.pk/NewsSource/agencies
Agencies
January 07, 2021

ISLAMABAD - The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Wednesday accepted the post-arrest bail plea of Dr Dinshaw Hoshang Anklesaria, the main accused in the fake bank accounts case.

The three-member SC bench comprising Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah and Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, however, directed Dr Dinshaw to cooperate with the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) in investigations and barred him from leaving the country.

The apex court, however, rejected the bail petition of co-accused Jamil Baloch, director of the Karachi Development Authority (KDA).

According to NAB, Dr Dinshaw, an accountant of Park Lane Estate Company and advisor to the Sindh chief minister had illegally got allotted an amenity plot belonging to Bagh Ibne Qasim Karachi to the Bahria Town, in connivance with Jamil Baloch causing over Rs 100 billion loss to the national exchequer. Bahria Town has constructed its Icon Tower over the plot.

Both Dr Dinshaw and Jamil Baloch had been in NAB custody in the fake bank accounts case. During the course of proceedings, the NAB prosecutor said the Bureau would not oppose bail to Dr Dinshaw,

However, it would oppose the bail pleas of government officials.

Dr Dinshaw’s granted post-arrest bail, Co-accused’s bail petition rejected

He said the Bureau had asked Zain Malik of Bahria Town to submit a no-objection certificate (NoC) over his plea bargain application till February 15, and in case of failure to do so, action would be taken against him.
Justice Bandial said the court was not satisfied with the performance of NAB. It wanted the Bureau stronger, and it should show bravery and moral courage, he added. Law should be applied equally to all.

Accountability should be carried out in accordance with the law, but NAB seemed to be under pressure from all quarters.

If the Bureau did not act in accordance with the law, the court would take action, he added.

Justice Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi said NAB did not have the power to act on its own. Only with amendment in Section 9, it could do whatever it wanted, he added.

He said NAB did not catch the big corrupt people while small thieves were put in jail for five years. The Bureau did not arrest the real culprit involved in corruption scams.

The prosecutor general replied that NAB did not work on its own as it produced the accused before the Accountability Court within 24 hours of their arrest.

Justice Naqvi observed that the court knew that the cases dealt with by NAB were not ordinary criminal cases. NAB arrested government officials first but not those against whom it had evidence of their wrongdoings. The NAB prosecutor said there was no pressure on the Bureau and no one stopped it from working.

Justice Sajjad Ali Shah remarked that NAB knew that it was difficult for Zain Malik to produce the NoC. If Zain Malik did so then NAB would initiate trial of the NOC’s issuers.

The NAB prosecutor replied that if the NOC was produced, its issuer would also be included in the lawsuit. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah asked as to why NAB had given time to the main accused till February 15.
Justice Bandial said the bench had gone through the NAB’s performance report. The Bureau had collected billions of rupees, he added.
 

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Supreme Court to hear Senate elections’ references today

The Frontier Post
January 10, 2021


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court has constituted a five-judge larger bench to commence hearing on a presidential reference seeking the court’s opinion whether ‘open ballot’ for Senate elections would help acknowledge the respect of choice and desire of the citizen voters on Monday (January 11).

The five-member larger bench would be headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed and comprising of Justice Mushir Alam, Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijaz-ul-Ahsan and Justice Yahya Afridi.

Attorney General Khalid Jawed Khan would represent President Dr Arif Alvi.

On December 23, President Arif Alvi, after approving the proposal of the prime minister, had filed a 11-page reference in the Supreme Court under Article 186 of the Constitution relating to the advisory jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and sought its opinion on holding the upcoming elections for the upper house of the Parliament through open ballot and show of hands.

At the previous hearing on January 04, the apex court had issued notices to the advocates general of all four provinces and the Islamabad Capital Territory, the speakers of all provincial assemblies, speaker of the National Assembly, Chairman Senate and the Election Commission of Pakistan directing them to submit written synopses to the court. Any other party interested in being a part of the case could also file petitions in the Supreme Court, the order said.

The court also directed that notices be published in newspapers to seek the public’s opinion on the matter. The apex court also asked senior advocate, Hadi Shakeel, from Quetta to appear and assist the court as amicus curiae.

According to replies submitted by the provinces of Punjab and Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa, both the provinces backed presidential reference, seeking guidance from the Supreme Court on the federal government’s plan to amend the Election Act 2017 through an ordinance to allow the use of open-ballot at the upcoming Senate elections.

“It is the considered view of the Punjab that the reference in question may kindly be answered in the affirmative so that by undertaking necessary remedial statutory action, the Election Act 2017 is amended and enable the elections to the Senate to be held through open ballot,” pleads Advocate General of Punjab Ahmad Awais in a rejoinder.

“This provincial government supports the reference No. 01, 2020, sent by the President to this Honourable Court,” said the KP advocate general in his reply.
 

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Justice Ijaz says Parliament makes laws and the SC interprets them

The Frontier Post
January 14, 2021

ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Thursday adjourned hearing on Presidential reference seeking an opinion on open balloting for the upcoming Senate elections till Monday.

A five-member larger bench headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed and comprising Justice Mushir Alam, Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Yahya Afridi heard the reference.

During the course of proceedings, Attorney General for Pakistan Khalid Jawed Khan said that he wanted to start his arguments with questions from Justice Yahya Afridi.

Answering a question about not sending the issue to the Parliament, the Attorney General said that the federation had approached the Supreme Court for its opinion.

He said that the the government’s case was to interpret Article 226.

Justice Ijaz said that Parliament made laws and the Supreme Court interpreted them.

The Attorney General said that the Supreme Court had ruled 23 years ago that decisions should be made without distinguishing between political and non-political questions. Every country had a Supreme Court or a Constitutional Court to interpret constitutional matters, he added.

He said that Pakistan’s Supreme Court was the constitutional court. In many countries, including Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka and the United States, the Supreme Court interpreted the Constitution in constitutional and political matters, he added.

He said if political matters prevailed over constitutional matters, then the court avoided these matters. The Supreme Court had also interpreted political issues several times, he added.

He said that the Supreme Court had often referred political matters back to Parliament.

The Chief Justice asked the AGP to inform where procedure for holding Senate elections was written in the law?

The AGP replied that the Election Act 2017 contained the responsibilities of the Election Commission and the procedure for holding elections to the National and Provincial Assemblies.

Justice Ijaz asked where was the procedure for Senate elections mentioned in the Election Act 2017?
The Attorney General said that the complete procedure for Senate elections was mentioned in chapter 7 of the Election Act 2017. Section 26 of the Act dealt with Senate elections.

Justice Yahya Afridi said that the section 26 mentioned secret ballot for the election of senators.
The AGP said that Senate elections were held under the law, not under the constitution.
 

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Supreme Court defines ‘poast’ in clear terms


Says not all parts of poppy plant can be called opium


Hasnaat Malik
January 23, 2021

supreme court of pakistan photo afp file



Supreme Court of Pakistan. PHOTO: AFP/FILE


ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has defined the term “poast” or opium while hearing an appeal of a man convicted by lower courts for possessing a sack full of opium poppy.

"Poast is the name given to that part of a poppy plant which has the shape of a basket, sack or pouch and it contains the seeds of such a plant. In some parts of this country this natural pouch of the poppy plant is also known as doda,” said Justice Mazhar Ali Akbar Naqvi in a 6-page verdict on the appeal.

Justice Naqvi noted that Section 2(t) of the Control of Narcotics Substances Act (CNSA), 1997 defines “opium” as the poppy straw, that is to say, all parts of the poppy plant (Papaver Somniferum or any other species of Papaver) after mowing, other than the seeds.

According to the CNSA, the spontaneously coagulated juice of capsules of poppy – which has not been submitted to any manipulations other than those necessary for packing and transport – is also opium.

“[Under Section 2(t) of the CNSA, opium is also] any mixture, with or without natural materials, of any of the above forms of opium, but does not include any preparation containing not more than 0.2 per cent of morphine,” stated the verdict.

The judge noted that as per the definition clause of the CNSA, 1997 after mowing, all parts of the poppy plant except seeds are considered to be poppy straw.

He referred to two of the SC orders which declared that it is only the basket, sack or pouch (doda) excluding seeds, which contains narcotic substance and that poppy straw may not necessarily be “poast” because poppy straw can be any other part of the mowed poppy plant as well, excluding the seeds.

The court said it has been seen that often stems and leaves of the poppy plants are used as animal food.

"The plant can reach the height of about 1-5 meters (3-16 feet). Poppy straw is derived from the plant Papaver Somniferum, which has been cultivated in many countries of Europe and Asia for centuries. This has medicinal impact as well, which is largely used as a tonic for wellness of the nervous system".

The court said the purpose of poppy cultivation is actually the production of poppy seeds. The latter is used as food stuff and as a raw material for manufacturing poppy-seed oil, which is used for making various varnishes, paints and soaps etc.


The case

Police registered a case against petitioner Zulfiqar on October 20, 2007 under Section 9 (c) of the CNSA, 1997 in Faisalabad after they apprehended him from his house with a sack full of bhukki/poast.

There was 15kg of poast in the bag. Out of the 15kg, 500 grams was separated for chemical analysis. The report of the chemical examiner was positive. The trial court on August 28, 2009 sentenced Zulfiqar to life imprisonment. The Lahore High Court (LHC) also upheld his life imprisonment.

The SC asked as to what actually was recovered from the petitioner. “Was it only the doda/basket/pouch or it was the whole plant with stems and flowers?” It noted that the petitioner is behind the bars for more than 13 years and his remaining sentence is less than two years.

"For what has been discussed above, we while maintaining the conviction of the petitioner, reduce the sentence of imprisonment for life awarded to him into what he has already undergone.

“The petitioner shall be released from jail forthwith, unless detained in any other case. This jail petition is accordingly converted into appeal and partly allowed," the order concluded.
 

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
SC to hear Daniel Pearl murder case appeal on Thursday

  • The bench will hear the plea seeking suspension of the SHC's judgment regarding acquitting/releasing the accused in Pearl's murder case.


APP
24 Jan 2021






ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has fixed hearing of the Daniel Pearl murder case for Thursday (January 28).

Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed constituted a three-judge bench headed by Justice Mushir Alam and comprising of Justice Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Yahya Afridi to hear the Sindh government and the appeal of Daniel Pearl's parents against the Sindh High Court's (SHC) judgment.

The bench will hear the plea seeking suspension of the SHC's judgment regarding acquitting/releasing the accused in Pearl's murder case.

On April 2, 2020, the SHC had commuted the death sentence of Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh - the man convicted of kidnapping and murdering American journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002 - to a seven-year sentence.

The SHC had also acquitted three others who had been awarded life imprisonment in the case.
The slain journalist's parents had approached the Supreme Court against the Sindh High Court’s verdict.
Two criminal petitions have been filed by a lawyer Faisal Siddiqi on behalf of Pearl's parents - Ruth Pearl and Judie Pearl- against the acquittal and release of the four accused.
 

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Supreme Court seeks details of wealth tax case against Sharifs

Directs FBR’s counsel to submit status of appeals filed by the Sharif family


Our Correspondent
January 25, 2021

former prime minister nawaz sharif photo file



Former prime minister Nawaz Sharif. PHOTO: FILE


ISLAMABAD :The Supreme Court on Monday directed the counsel for the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) to submit details over the status of appeals filed by the Sharif family against the levy of wealth tax.

A three-member bench, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial and comprising Justice Sajjad Ali Shah and Justice Munib Akhtar, heard the case.

During the course of proceedings, the counsel said that the FBR issued a notice of additional tax to the Sharif family over late payment.

The Sharif family challenged the notice in the Lahore High Court (LHC), he added.

Justice Bandial asked the counsel when did the Sharif family file the application for tax refund?

Justice Shah said that the FBR had issued the first notice to the Sharif family in 1997, and then issued the notice of additional tax after five years in 2002. “Why did the FBR keep waiting for five years?” he asked.

Justice Akhtar asked the FBR’s counsel to inform the court about the status of appeals filed by the Sharif family against levy of wealth tax. He said that it could be possible that the Tax Appellant Authority might have decided in favour of the Sharif family, adding that the Sharif family filed a petition in the LHC on additional tax.

The counsel sought time from the court for getting fresh instructions from the FBR in the case.
The court adjourned further hearing of the case indefinitely at the request of the lawyer.
 

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Fake accounts case Sindh CM Murad Ali Shah appears before NAB



SC to hear review petition seeking Murad’s disqualification

The Frontier Post
January 24, 2021


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court (SC) has fixed a review petition, seeking disqualification of Sindh Chief Minister Syed Murad Ali Shah over allegedly possessing dual nationality, for hearing.

A three-member SC bench headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial would hear the case filed by Roshan Ali. The petitioner in his plea said that the Sindh chief minister, while concealing his UAE work permit and his dual nationality and lying in front of the electoral body during the 2013 general elections, is no more truthful and honest, thus he should be declared disqualified.

The plea would be taken up by the SC bench on January 28. Notice has been served to Syed Murad Ali Shah for the hearing. A bench of the apex court had earlier dismissed the appeal of the petitioner against a verdict of Sindh High Court seeking disqualification of the chief minister.

It is to be noted that a Sindh High Court bench had rejected a petition seeking disqualification of Sindh CM for failing to disclose his Canadian nationality and the United Arab Emirates Iqama to the Election Commission of Pakistan.
 

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
SC seeks schedule of local body polls from ECP

Top court adjourns hearing till February 4

January 28, 2021


ISLAMABAD:The Supreme Court on Thursday sought the schedule of local body elections to be held in the provinces from the Election Commission of Pakistan and expressed displeasure over the delay.

During a hearing of the local bodies elections case in Islamabad, the court also sought the presence of the attorney general, chief election commissioner, and other officials of ECP, who appeared in the court.

Justice Qazi Faez Isa, during the hearing, said that it seems that the Election Commission is not taking directions from the Constitution, but from 'somewhere else'.

Referring to the Article 6 of the Constitution, the senior judge said, "those creating hurdles in the Constitution's implementation are committing high treason. He advised the CEC to "step down from your post if you cannot organise the elections."

He further commented that it seems that democracy is no longer a priority of the election authority. "Why are the local bodies polls not being organised," he asked and added, "why are the masses being deprived of democracy."

Reminding the ECP officials of their constitutional oath, Justice Isa said, "not organising by-elections means [the authority is] not following the directions of the top court." He went on to add that the attorney general should tell the prime minister that "Constitution is more important."

Responding, the CEC pledged to organise local bodies elections in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa on April 8.

Adjourning the hearing till February 4, the SCP told the CEC to discuss elections in the provinces with the officials and submit the minutes of the meeting on the said date.
 

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
SC adjourns review petition seeking CM Sindh Murad Ali Shah’s disqualification

The Frontier Post
January 28, 2021


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday adjourned a review petition, seeking disqualification of Chief Minister (CM) of Sindh Syed Murad Ali Shah over allegedly possessing dual nationality till date in office. A three-member SC bench headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial heard the case filed by Roshan Ali.

The petitioner in his plea said that the Sindh chief minister, while concealing his UAE work permit and his dual nationality and lying in front of the electoral body during the 2013 general elections, is no more truthful and honest, thus he should be declared disqualified.

During the course of proceedings, Advocate Hamid Khan counsel for the petitioner said that he client had filed a petition to form a larger bench in the case. The verdict in the case of Justice Faez Isa on the same issue was also reserved, he added.


Justice Bandial said that the point regarding sitting of the judges in a review case was very important.

He said it would be better to wait until the other case was decided.
 

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
No anticipatory bail in criminal cases: Supreme Court

Says only exception to the rule are cases in which mala fide is ‘manifestly intriguing’


Hasnaat Malik
January 30, 2021


ISLAMABAD: The apex courthas declared that the accused in a criminal case cannot be granted anticipatory bail unless mala fide is “manifestly intriguing upon the intended arrest”.

“It is by now well-settled that the accused in a criminal case cannot be granted anticipatory bail to subvert or undermine investigative procedure/process.

“[This process] essentially includes arrest in order to bring the statutory exercise to its logical end for effective and meaningful prosecution of the offence through collection of information/evidence consequent upon arrest,” said a written order penned by Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed.

Justice Ahmed was part of a three-judge bench – presided over by Justice Mushir Alam – that heard the bail applications of two Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) officers, arrested in a case registered with the FIA Anti-Corruption Circle (ACC) in Karachi.

The officers were accused to have received bribe of Rs24million from Sheikh Muhammad Munawar, arrayed as accused in a financial scam. Munawar had allegedly defrauded the Utility Stores Corporation to effect a massive sale transaction through a fake ISO certification.

During the inquiry, incriminatory statements of various witnesses were forensically confirmed from the computer CDR and ledgers secured from the custody of co-accused Abdul Qadir Memon, a front man. It was on the basis of this comprehensive probe that the petitioners braced for an impending prosecution.

The written order said: “A detailed parallel story narrated by the petitioners notwithstanding, they were admittedly at the helm of affairs to call the shot and thus in a position to rescue the complainant from the troubled situation he was trapped”.

It said various pieces of evidence including forensic data, beyond susceptibility of human interference unmistakably suggest a conduct perfidious to the call of their duty hence, prima facie, cognizable. The court, therefore, dismissed the bail applications.

The order said that mala fide – manifestly intriguing upon the intended arrest – is the only justification to suspend or divert the usual course of law in the case of anticipatory bails. However, this step is “most extraordinary by all means”




 

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
SC directs authorities to move Omar Sheikh from death cell to rest house

Dawn.com
February 2, 2021




In this March 29, 2002 file photo, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, the alleged mastermind behind Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl's kidnap-slaying, appears at the court in Karachi. — AP/File


In this March 29, 2002 file photo, Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, the alleged mastermind behind Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl's kidnap-slaying, appears at the court in Karachi. — AP


The Supreme Court on Tuesday directed authorities to move Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, the prime accused in the 2002 killing of American journalist Daniel Pearl, from a death cell in the Karachi Central Prison to a government rest house within the next two to three days.

The apex court also directed authorities to ensure complete security of the rest house, and allowed Sheikh's family access to him from 8am to 5pm, while hearing a petition filed by the accused against his detention despite high court orders in this regard.

The accused, however, will not be given access to mobile and internet services while his family will be given accommodation and transport on the government's expense, according to the court's directives.

On Jan 28, by a majority of two to one, the apex court had upheld the high court's acquittal of Sheikh for Pearl's murder and ordered his release if he was not wanted in any other case.
A day earlier, Attorney General (AG) Khalid Jawed Khan Attorney General Khalid Jawed Khan appeared before a three-judge SC bench, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, to highlight that the high court had barred the federal government from issuing any preventive detention order when there was a mandatory requirement to issue a notice and hear the AG before issuing such orders.

The Supreme Court, however, preferred to maintain the status quo for a day instead of granting any stay against the SHC order in which the federal and provincial governments were directed not to issue any preventive detention order without prior permission of the high court.
The high court had also directed that all the accused — Sheikh, Fahad Nasim Ahmed, Syed Salman Saqib and Sheikh Muhammad Adil — be released from jail forthwith on the receipt of the order unless they were wanted in any other custody case.

During today's hearing, the attorney general told the court that the country had been affected by terrorism during the past 20 years. "Tragedies such as those at the Army Public School and in Mach have not occurred anywhere else in the world. Omer Sheikh is not an accused but a terrorist mastermind."

Justice Umar Ata Bandial responded by asking the attorney general to prove Sheikh's terrorist links. "How does he relate to the incidents you have mentioned?" the judge asked.
The attorney general responded by saying that the state was of the opinion that the case against Sheikh was strong.

At this, Justice Muneeb Akhtar replied that until yesterday the attorney general's stance was that the SHC did not hear the federal government. "From your arguments it seems that you no longer have these objections," the judge remarked.

However, the Sindh advocate general replied that the federal government was not a party in the case heard by the high court.
"Did the Sindh government raise any objection in the high court regarding this?" asked Justice Akhtar. The Sindh advocate general replied that no objection was raised.
"The detention of the accused seems to be a provincial matter. The federal government has delegated its authority to the provinces. Therefore, it seems that only the Sindh advocate general needs to be given notice," Justice Akhtar said.
"The petitioner did not challenge a law which would warrant sending a notice to the attorney general," the judge remarked, adding that there were no grounds for a notice to be sent to the attorney general.
The attorney general replied that the court could not deprive the federal government of its powers. "There should also be proof before exercising powers," said Justice Shah, adding that the provincial government did not have proof to keep the accused detained.
When the attorney general replied that it was possible the state was in possession of such proof, the judge questioned why the material was not handed over to the provincial government.
"It seems that the attorney general has not read the reasons for the decision of the high court," said Justice Shah.
Justice Bandial also asked the federal government to present the evidence against the accused.
The attorney general informed the court that Sheikh held both Pakistani and British citizenship and had studied at the London Schools of Economics.
Justice Bandial remarked that Sheikh had been incarcerated for 18 years while the charges proven against him were for kidnapping. "Keeping one detained means 'no trial'," he said, adding that it would be wrong to accuse someone of being a terrorist without proof.
 

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
SC asks govt to submit reply in FATA merger case

The Frontier Post
February 3, 2021

ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the Federal Government to submit its response in a case challenging 25th Constitutional Amendment.

A three-member SC bench comprising Justice Umar Ata Bandial, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Sajjad Ali Shah heard the case. The 25th Constitutional Amendment was passed by the Parliament in May 2018 under which the erstwhile Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) were merged in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. The constitutional petition was filed by elders and Maliks of the former tribal areas through Barrister Wasim Sajjad.

During the course of proceedings, the bench asked how the amendment regarding the merger of FATA, which was administered by the Federation, with a province was approved.

Waseem Sajjad said the wording was changed in the 25th Amendment.

Justice Munib Akhtar said the merger of Provincially Administered Tribal Areas (PATA) into the provinces was possible because they were already their part.

He asked what was the procedure for the merger of FATA with the province.

Waseem Sajjad said the constitutional status of the tribal areas was abolished, which was against the basic structure of the Constitution. No constitutional amendment could go against the basic structure of the Constitution, he added.

He said that the provincial assembly passed the bill without seeking the governor’s approval while the president approved the bill directly.


The Additional Attorney General said the amendment did not affect any fundamental rights of the tribal areas.


He said the petition was not maintainable under Article 184/3, and the government wanted to submit written objections in that regard, which the court allowed.

Later, the case was adjourned for a month.
 

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
SC directs Federal Govt to hand over Katas Raj Temple to ETPB

The Frontier Post /
February 15, 2021


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Monday directed the Federal Government to take over the control of Katas Raj Temple from Punjab government and hand it over to the Evacuee Trust Properties Board (ETPB) within two weeks.

A three-member SC bench headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Gulzar Ahmed heard the suo moto notice case regarding the rights of minorities.

During the course of proceedings, the court expressed annoyance over non-appearance of the Chief Secretary Punjab, observing that its order had also not been implemented.

The Secretary Implementation Punjab replied that the chief secretary was busy due to the cabinet meeting.
The CJP observed that the duty of the chief secretary was to ensure implementation of the court orders.
The court sought the report regarding restoration of Parlab Temple Multan within two weeks.

Minorities leader Ramesh Kumar informed the court that an amount of Rs 38 million had been spent on the Samadhi before the Karak incident and the ETPB had not paid the expenditures.
The court asked Ramesh Kumar to submit details of the expenditure incurred on Samadhi.


Advocate Kamran Murtaza, counsel for the accused, said the proceedings of criminal cases were not continuing due to the suo moto notice and the trial courts were not granting bails to more than 100 people arrested in the case.

The CJP observed that the SC had directed the trial court to proceed under the law and asked whether any recovery had been made from the accused of the Karak incident.

Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan directed to make recoveries from the attackers, who were shown in the videos of attack.

The Advocate General KP said the amount of damages was being calculated and notices would also be issued to the accused. Faisal Chaudhry, Additional Advocate General Punjab, said the walls of Parlab Temple were weak and there was danger of its collapse.



The chief justice remarked that the court had already issued order to provide security to the temple and asked whether the Punjab government was providing security for the Holi festival.

The Additional Advocate General Punjab requested the court to allow the reconstruction of the walls of historic temple. The Parlab Temple and the shrine of Bahauddin Zakariya was adjacent, he added. He said it was directed to celebrate the festival on March 26 whereas the opposition had announced a long march on March 26 and due to political environment, the provision of security would be difficult as the Punjab government had to look all the aspects of security.
 

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Mar 21, 2007
54,935
55
84,129
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
SC delists Khursheed bail plea

The Frontier Post /
February 17, 2021


ISLAMABAD (APP): The Supreme Court on Wednesday delisted PPP leader and former Leader of Opposition in National Assembly Syed Khursheed Ahmed Shah’s bail matter due to unavailability of the bench.

A three-member SC bench, headed by Justice Mushir Alam, was to hear bail pleas filed by Syed Khursheed Shah and his family.

The case was delisted due to unavailability of Justice Sardar Tariq.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom