Judge Tariq contests IHC ruling restricting his work until SJC verdict is announced
In a significant development, the Islamabad High Court (IHC) has restrained Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri from performing judicial work, pending a decision by the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) on allegations of a fake law degree.
The petition, filed by Mian Dawood last July, contends that the impugned order restricting Justice Jahangiri's judicial work was issued without a fair hearing and due process, thereby breaching the right to access to justice and due process guaranteed by Article 10A. The petition asserts that no order could have been passed on Mian Dawood's application due to the aforementioned reasons.
The petition was initially listed as an objection case on 16.09.2025, with notice issued only to respondent No. 1, who did not appear before the bench on that day. The Division Bench of the IHC, comprising Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar and Justice Azam Khan, issued the restraining order on 16-09-25.
The PTI is seeking the intervention of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) regarding the barring of Justice Jahangiri from judicial work. Justice Jahangiri, however, has filed a civil petition under Article 185(3) of the constitution, claiming that Dawood's application, which alleges a fake degree, has been in the IHC since September 2024 without being addressed.
The complaint about Justice Jahangiri's alleged forged academic certificate, leading to his removal from the judge position, was reportedly made by a fellow legal professional or authority, but the specific individual's name is not publicly disclosed. The SJC is yet to make a decision on the allegations of a fake degree against Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri.
The petition maintains that the impugned order is in breach of the right to an open hearing, as no order was passed in open court overruling the objections and fixing the application for hearing, and no cause list was issued after which the Bench reconvened to hear the petition. The petition's maintainability was reserved for judgment by former Chief Justice IHC, Aamer Farooq.
The impugned order is also alleged to be in breach of Articles 189 and 209(7) of the Constitution, as it was passed in callous disregard of these provisions. The petition argues that the impugned order violates the principles of natural justice and fair hearings, making it patently illegal and unprecedented, and a near-fatal blow to the independence of the judiciary.
The IHC has not specified the date of the restraining order on Justice Jahangiri's judicial work in the provided paragraphs. The case is currently under review by the Supreme Judicial Council, and a decision is awaited.
Read also:
- United States tariffs pose a threat to India, necessitating the recruitment of adept negotiators or strategists, similar to those who had influenced Trump's decisions.
- Weekly happenings in the German Federal Parliament (Bundestag)
- Southwest region's most popular posts, accompanied by an inquiry:
- Discussion between Putin and Trump in Alaska could potentially overshadow Ukraine's concerns
