ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) has sought explanations from two High Court judges over complaints of alleged misconduct leveled against them.
The SJC, headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi, is learned to have formally asked both judges to respond to the allegations. One of the judges is currently serving in the Sindh High Court (SHC), while the other is serving in the Islamabad High Court (IHC).
One of the judges has been asked to explain why he accompanied sacked IHC judge Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri during his appearance before the SHC.
In September 2025, a complaint was filed against him with the SJC. The complainant alleged that Jahangiri had traveled to Karachi to hear a false degree case and that the respondent judge canceled the case list of his court from September 24 to 26 and appeared alongside Justice Jahangiri in the SHC.
The plaintiff further claimed that the defendant judge removed cases from the list without any personal or official justification, adding that a judge cannot appear in a proceeding before another judge.
It was also alleged that the respondent judge tried to influence the SHC court and violated her oath and the judicial code of conduct.
The SJC has also asked another judge for an explanation over allegations of not granting an adequate right of hearing in a “sensitive case.” It is known that the council recently decided to ask both judges for explanations and has now formally started the process.
Interestingly, both judges signed the widely discussed “famous letter” addressed to the SJC, seeking guidance on alleged interference by executive agencies in judicial functions.
In March 2024, six IHC judges wrote an open letter to the SJC, alleging intimidation and “blatant meddling” in judicial matters by an intelligence agency in politically significant cases.
The matter remains pending due to an ongoing ex officio process.
Senior lawyers believe the SJC’s history suggests it has often been more active against judges who are not seen as good for the executive.
On Thursday, the SJC also considered allegations of misconduct against its own members. However, the council’s statement did not clearly specify the outcome or fate of those complaints.
It may be noted that before his dismissal, former IHC judge Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri had filed a complaint of misconduct against the current IHC chief justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar, who is also a member of the council.
Jahangiri had alleged that CJ Dogar was under “immense pressure” for quick disposal of a quo warranto petition against him.
According to the complaint, Justice Dogar allegedly suggested, both directly and indirectly, that if Jahangiri submitted a post-dated resignation and handed it over for safekeeping, it would help alleviate external pressure and allow the proceedings to be concluded.
In his complaint, Jahangiri further alleged that the Chief Justice had not been “frank in his language”.
He claimed that an order announced in open court on September 16, 2025 was “diametrically opposed and completely inconsistent” with a subsequent House order.
The second order, he claimed, was issued in a “deceptive manner.”
The fate of this complaint against the IHC Chief Justice remains unclear.
