| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2025 SLG 3643 2025 SLD 3643 = 2025 SHC 1488 |
Sindh High Court
C.P. No.D-23 of 2022
Mohammad Karim Khan Agha, J.
m/s m.tariq mansoor and ahmed zameer advocates for petitioners mr.salman talibuddin,advocate general sindh a/w mr.muhammad yousuf rahpoto,assistant advocate general
C.P. No.D-23 of 2022
Mohammad Karim Khan Agha, J.
m/s m.tariq mansoor and ahmed zameer advocates for petitioners mr.salman talibuddin,advocate general sindh a/w mr.muhammad yousuf rahpoto,assistant advocate general
1.kanwar naveed jameel s/o kanwar jameel ahmed 2. kishwer zehra d/o syed rashid mehdi 3. syed hashim raza s/o syed najam-ul-hasan 4. ghulam gillani s/o gulsheed ahmed khan 5. javed hanif khan s/o muhammad hanif khan 6. waseem uddin qureshi s/o rafi uddin qureshi
VS
1. The province of sindh 2. The Secretary
Law:
Section:
SummaryThis is an order from the High Court of Sindh, Karachi, regarding a constitutional petition filed by several petitioners. The petitioners sought the recusal of a presiding judge due to perceived impartiality and requested the formation of a larger bench of 10 judges to hear the case, citing its complexity. The court reviewed these requests carefully. It held that judge recusal is a matter for the judge’s conscience and that attempts to manipulate bench formation through misconduct or recusal requests are discouraged and detrimental to judicial integrity. The court found no exceptional legal complexity justifying a larger bench. The petitioners’ requests were dismissed, and the conduct of their counsel, who behaved in an unprofessional and potentially contemptuous manner, was strongly cautioned against.Core PointsPetitioners requested judge recusal on grounds of perceived bias; court emphasized judge’s discretion to decide recusal.Attempts to influence bench composition through counsel misconduct or recusal demands are unethical and discouraged.Court referred to Supreme Court precedents discouraging unnecessary recusal and bench manipulation.No exceptional legal questions…