ISLAMABAD: Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail said a two-judge bench should not have heard CPLA No 836-K of 2020, when it was pointed out that important question of law is involved in it.

The presiding judge said the moment it was pointed out the bench should have forthwith transferred the case to the constitutional bench under Article 191A of the constitution, adding all the judges of the apex court have taken oath to protect and preserve the constitution.

A six-judge special court, headed by Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail, on Monday, after hearing arguments reserved judgment on SC Additional Registrar (Judicial) Nazar Abbas’s Intra-Court Appeal (ICA) against the show-cause notice, issued to him in contempt of court proceedings.

The bench disposed of the ICA, but Justice Mandokhail said they would announce reasons later on. However, Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Shahid Waheed simply disposed of the case, saying as the registrar has withdrawn ICA; therefore, nothing is before them and thus, disposed of appeal.

Justice Mandokhail questioned if someone violates the constitution, then what are its consequences. “Are we (judges) not bound by the constitution?” Every day there is high drama involving regarding this amendment, which should end now, he remarked.

Justice Mazhar said that in the past many cases like the instant matter came before them (Justice Mansoor and Justice Ayesha), but they immediately referred to the Constitutional Bench. Justice Mussarat Hilali what was special in that case that Justice Mansoor, being the member of the Committee, has fixed it before him.

At the onset of the proceeding, Registrar’s counsel submitted as the two-judge bench, which had issued show-cause notice in contempt proceedings, has discharged the notice; therefore, he likes to withdraw the ICA.

Justice Mandokhail questioned if the contempt notice had been discharged against the Registrar then why long order has been passed. He noted that the bench gave findings against the members of the Committees. He asked whether any notice has been issued to them, adding one Committee comprises Chief Justice of Pakistan, Justice Mansoor and Justice Aminud Din Khan, while the Constitutional Committee includes Justice Amin, Justice Mandokhail and Justice Mazhar.

Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar remarked that the judgment of two-judge bench has also held accountable other two members of Constitutional Committees, set up under Article 191A of the constitution, without giving them opportunity to clarify their position. If the notice had been discharged against the Registrar, then why strictures passed against the Committees’ members. He said had the bench issued them notice, they might have filed their replies.

He said the CPLA No 836-K of 2020 in which the observation has been passed is now fixed before a seven-member constitutional bench tomorrow (Tuesday).

Justice Mandokhail remarked now they have become contemner. He said according to the two-judge bench the Committee members; i.e., Chief Justice and Justice Amin are responsible for violating the judicial order.

He asked whether the contemner can fix the case before the Full Court, as the matter has been referred to the CJP for constituting Full Court. He further questioned whether the four contemners can sit in the Full Court.

Justice Shahid said this bench is hearing appeal against the show-cause notice order, and inquired in the contempt appeal can they go beyond our jurisdiction and observe other issues. He said this Court is not proper forum to hear this matter, when the appeal has been withdrawn.

Justice Mazhar noted that the order (two-judge) has not confined itself to the contempt matter, adding the ICA is continuation of the main case (CPLA 836).

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025