Case Details

Citation(s)
2023 SLG 1929 2023 PLD 510 2023 SLD 1929

Constitutional Petition No. 19 of 2020, decided on 27th June, 2023. (Under Article 184(3) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. (Amended)).Date of hearing: 13th June, 2023.
Present: Ijaz ul Ahsan and Munib Akhtar, JJ
Ms. Hina Jilani, Advocate Supreme Court (via Video-Link, Lahore) for Petitioners. N.R. for
Respondents

AFIYA SHEHRBANO ZIA and others---Petitioners

VERSUS

The HON'BLE SUPREME JUDICIAL COUNCIL and others---Respondents

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 209(5),209(6),209(7),184(3)

Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Arts. 209(5), 209(6) 209(7)---Reference against a Judge before the Supreme Judicial Council (the Council)---Judge against whom a complaint/reference has been filed before the Council but who either retires or resigns before a report is made by the Council to the President or he makes an order thereon---Plea of petitioner that in such a situation the complaint/reference abates; the matter ends without resolution either way, and the complainant is simply informed that the complaint stands closed; that such a result is inimical to the access to justice and its safe administration, and indeed the independence of the judiciary, and creates an impression of impunity of Judges---Held, that Article 209 of the Constitution does not apply to a person who has retired or resigned from the office of a Judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court---It is necessary for the Council, if it forms the necessary opinion, to report to the President that the Judge be removed from office and on such report the President may do so---Thus, the only action permissible to the Council, and hence the President, is the removal of the errant Judge from office---If this is not possible, then clause (6) of Article 209 of the Constitution can have no application---Obviously, this outcome is impossible in relation to a Judge who has already retired or resigned---Council can only make a finding of misconduct in terms of Article 209, which applies only to a Judge still in office at the relevant time and results in his removal from office---Constitution draws a distinction between a person who, at the relevant time, holds office as a Judge and one who, having held that office in the past, does not---Article 209 of the Constitution applies only to the former and not the latter. ORDER MUNIB AKHTAR, J.---Through this petition, filed under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, the petitioners canvass two propositions in relation to Article 209. As is well known, this Article relates to the basis on and the manner in which a Judge of the Supreme Court or a High Court can be removed from office by the President, on a report made by the Supreme Judicial Council (Council), a…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492