Islamabad (Web Desk): The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday reserved its judgment in a contempt of court case involving Additional Registrar Nazar Abbas.
A two-member bench of the top court heard the contempt of court case against the additional registrar for not scheduling the bench powers case for hearing.
The issue arose when Abbas, who had been removed from his post, mistakenly assigned cases to a regular bench that were supposed to be heard by the constitutional bench, including a case challenging the vires of the Customs Act of 1969.
The cases, initially set to be heard by a three-judge bench on January 13, 2025, involved not only the merits of the case but also the constitutionality of a section of the Customs Act.
The jurisdiction of the bench was contested, and as a result, the cases were postponed to January 16.
In light of the significant procedural error, the Judicial Branch issued a note to the regular committee on January 17, prompting a review of the matter under the Supreme Court's new Practice and Procedure Act of 2023.
The committee, led by the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP), determined that the cases should be heard by the constitutional bench, as required by the Constitution, and directed that the cases be rescheduled accordingly.
This decision has also prompted concerns among some SC judges regarding the formation of benches and their powers.
Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Ayesha A Malik and Justice Aqeel Abbasi wrote a letter to Chief Justice Yahya Afridi and the head of the constitutional bench, Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan, to address these concerns.
During the proceedings, Justice Shah questioned the authority of the judges' committee to reverse judicial orders, suggesting that it could not override decisions made by the court. Amicus curiae Hamid Khan agreed, emphasizing that administrative decisions should not undermine judicial orders.
Justice Abbasi raised the issue of whether the 26th Constitutional Amendment had altered the way in which benches are formed, noting that the separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive could lead to confusion.
The discussion also touched on whether Parliament could legislate to determine the jurisdiction of courts, with Hamid asserting that while Parliament could affect lower courts, it could not limit the powers of the Supreme Court.
The hearing took a new turn when the Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP), Mansoor Usman Awan, pointed out that the current bench was not properly constituted to hear the contempt case, as the formation of a bench for contempt matters typically falls under the authority of the Chief Justice.
Awan further clarified that contempt cases should be handled according to the established procedure, which was not being followed in this instance.
Amid these arguments, Nazar Abbas submitted a response to the show-cause notice, requesting its withdrawal.
He contended that no judicial order had been disobeyed and clarified that the matter of bench formation had been referred to the Practice and Procedure Committee for further review.
After hearing the arguments, the SC reserved its verdict in the contempt of court case, which will be announced later.
