Islamabad:
A Constitutional Bank (CB) of the Supreme Court has withdrawn the orders of January 13 and 16 approved by a regular bank with respect to the clarification of the jurisdiction of the regular and constitutional banks of SC during the hearing of a group of cases of cases that challenge the vices of the Custom Law. , 1969.
On Tuesday, a CB of seven members led by Judge Aminuddin Khan resumed the hearing of the cases that were previously placed before a regular bank of three members headed by Judge Syed Mansoor Ali Shah.
However, on January 17, the Supreme Court Committee that lists the cases before the banks withdraw the cases of the regular bank and sent them to the CB committee for the reverence.
This was the regular bank that initiated a contempt procedure against an additional registrar, Nazar Abbas, for violating its order. Later, on January 27, the bank exonerated the official of the contempt positions, but pointed out that the SC committees had committed the court contempt.
He also ordered to place the cases once again before the original bank.
However, the CB of seven members listed later for the audience withdrew the regular bank orders dated January 13 and 16, Tuesday.
During the hearing, Pakistan Attorney (AGP) Mansoor Awan said that the government has decided to challenge the contempt of Judge Shah’s judicial decision addressed Bench.
“An appeal against the decision of contempt of the court issued the previous day will be presented, and it has been decided to challenge the orders of the justice of January 13 and 16,” he said.
During the hearing, Judge Muhammad Ali Mazhar commented that Judge Mansoor Ali Shah had ordered that Customs duty to be placed before his bank. He questioned if CB procedures could continue in the presence of this order.
Judge Jamal Commandkhail questioned the legitimacy of the order of the regular bank in the case of contempt.
“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.
Judge Mazhar expressed surprise, saying that the order of January 16 said that the case should be “considered heard.” He questioned the origin of the term, pointing out that a case is heard or is not. “Where does the expression ‘considered heard’ come from?” asked.
Agp Awan said he had two orders as of January 13. “One specified the next audience date like January 27, while the other declared on January 16. The date of the hearing had been altered in the order,” he said.
Judge Mazhar also said that it was not clear how, without complying with 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 registration of the contempt of the court of Nazar Abbas with the cases of customs duty and postponed the hearing indefinitely.
A bank member, Judge Ayesha Malik, withdrew from listening to the case. In a note issued after the hearing, he declared that he would not like to hear these cases to “protect and preserve the holiness of the original procedures and the judicial order of January 16”.
