The ruling stressed that the expeditious resolution of cases is essential for an effective justice system.
ISLAMABAD:
The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) has noted that, while delaying the disclosure of a reserved order does not invalidate it, such delay negatively affects judicial efficiency and undermines the timely administration of justice.
In a judgment partially admitting a petition challenging a judgment of the Sindh High Court (SHC), the FCC ordered removal of certain observations of the apex court.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s ruling in MFMY Industries Limited v. Federation of Pakistan, the FCC said the higher courts are expected to deliver reserved judgments within 90 days.
If complexities prevent a decision being made within this time frame, the matter must be re-listed for rehearing and decided within 120 days, it added.
The judgment underlined that expeditious resolution of cases is essential for an effective justice system, adding that without timely rulings, the very concept of justice is compromised, leaving litigants in prolonged uncertainty.
He also expanded on the legal framework that governs reserved sentences, stating that once a sentence is reserved, it remains within the exclusive domain of the court until it is formally pronounced in public hearing.
Any premature disclosure or leak of its content, before it is signed and issued as an official order, constitutes a serious violation of confidentiality and may invalidate the pronouncement, he stated.
Citing procedural rules, including Order
He stressed that unsigned or prematurely disclosed rulings are mere drafts and have no legal value. The court warned that any deviation from established rules and practices, whether by judges, court staff or parties, could have serious consequences.
Consequences include a rehearing of the case by a different court. The FCC reaffirmed that compliance with judicial rules is mandatory, since they have the force of law.
The court noted a recent trend of delays in issuing reserved judgments, which it said exacerbates the difficulties of litigants and erodes public confidence in the judicial system.
He stressed that such practices are unacceptable and should be strictly avoided. The court ordered that a copy of the judgment be distributed to all high courts for strict compliance with the rules governing judicial conduct and pronouncement of decisions.
The petitioner had approached the court against the SHC ruling of June 3, 2021, which had admitted a constitutional appeal filed under Article 199 of the Constitution.
