The Sindh Superior Court (SHC) has suspended the decision of the University of Karachi to cancel the title of the Judge of the Superior Court of Islamabad (IHC) Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri.
A two -member bank led by Judge Muhammad IQBAL Kalhoro heard the petition against the degree cancellation. Sindh’s general lawyer, Jawad Dro, the KU registrar, Professor Imran Siddiqui, and other officials were present at the hearing.
The registrar informed the court that the University had received a notice “only two days before” and requested time to present an answer.
The lawyer of the petitioner, the lawyer Salahuddin, looked for more time from the bank to respond while looking for the cancellation of the university team order in the meantime.
“How long do you need? If measures are taken against the petitioner during this period, who will compensate for the loss? If the order is reversed later, who will be responsible? This involves a man’s work life. Did you even notify the affected party?” The bank asked the registrar.
Read: Payment price of judicial independence: Jahangiri
Siddiqui replied that he had been appointed newly appointed registrar and that he was not aware of the history of the case.
This was more the bank. “If you are in court, you must provide answers. It may be that the action has been driven by a personal interest. The questions are asking about their title. Even if someone presents a request 30-35 years later, the affected person must be heard. We are not saying that the measures cannot be taken, but the honor of a person cannot be put into play.”
Judge Kalhoro added that the judicial decisions approved without listening to both parties had little weight. “Ex -part judgments are not considered good judgments.”
The Bank suspended the KU notification and restricted the University to take more measures based on the union and the recommendations of the Unjust Media Committee. The next hearing is scheduled for October 24.
‘Fictitious degree’
Ku had declared the title of Jahangiri in LLB “fictional” after his unfair media committee concluded that he had never registered in Islamia Law College and had participated in negligence during his LLB exams in the 1980s.
Ku Syndicate supported the findings, which later became the base of a complaint now pending before the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC).
‘Bad Fide’ intention
Judge Jahangiri argues that the cancellation was “illegal” and “bad faith”, claiming that he violated the principles of natural justice, since he was not notified before the decision. He also maintains that the measure is equivalent to political victimization, linking it with previous cases of it affirming judicial independence.
Jahangiri has referred to a letter signed in March 2024 against the surveillance of the judges and his work as a judge in an electoral court, which altered the candidates of the ruling party for their decisions, as examples of such cases.
Read more: SC departs an order that restricts the judge of IHC Jahangiri
Previously, on September 16, a divisional bank of the IHC, led by the president of the Supreme Court Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, prevented Judge Jehangiri from doing a judicial work, since he assumed a procedure in a request for quo guarantee challenging the validity of his LLB title.
Three days later, on September 19, Judge Jahangiri, along with four other IHC judges, presented constitutional requests separated before the Supreme Court, seeking to cancel the IHC restriction order.
On September 25, Ku formally canceled its LLB title, citing the previous union decision.
Also read: JAHANGIRI IHC SC requests in case of grade
Judge Jahangiri approached SHC challenging the maintainability of the procedures and highlighting that it had not been formally involved or notified.
During the hearing, his lawyer organized a strike for the discomfort of the SHC Bank. “Such behavior is highly disused,” the bank observed, warning that it could constitute contempt of the court.
On September 30, a Constitutional Bank of five members of the Supreme Court, headed by Judge Aminuddin Khan, suspended the IHC order that had forbidden Jahangiri from judicial work.
The Superior Court emphasized that a judge could not be restricted to perform tasks through an intermediate order and pointed out that only the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) has the authority to act against a seated judge.
The judicial duties of Judge Jahangiri were restored but limited to individual and divisional banks.
More recently, on October 3, Judge Jahangiri presented a petition before the Supreme Court against the SHC ruling that dismissed his statement to become part in the false case.
The petition argued that the SHC approved an ex -party sentence without listening to the injured party and appointed 10 institutions, including KU and the Sindh Higher Education Commission, as respondents.
The main lawyer Faisal Siddiqui questioned how the SHC could govern about maintaining without listening to the injured party first, while Jahangiri’s lawyer, Munir to Malik, argued that only the SJC has constitutional authority to take measures against a judge sitting. Malik stressed even more than canceling a title after 34 years was “unprecedented.”
The APPEX court must review the maintenance capacity of the requests, as well as the procedures adopted by Ku and SHC. Lawyers say that the result could have high -range implications for judicial independence and the process of awarding complaints against the judges.
