ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice PUISNE Chief Justice Justice Mansoor Ali Shah objected to the inclusion of Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar in the larger bench to hear the case filed in the Bench case. In his letter to the Judiciary Committee, Justice Shah said, “Judges who are in conflict of interest cannot sit on the bench. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar are the members of the committee he has appointed. CPLA matter no. 836-5/2020 and scheduled for 27-1-2025 before the Constitutional Bench”. The issue relates to the mislabelling of cases – which included the challenge of the 1969 own law virus – by Additional Registrar (Judicial) Nazar Abbas, who wrongly designated cases for the Constitution bench of the Supreme Court instead of the regular one. The issue relates to the mislabelling of cases – which included the challenge of the 1969 own law virus – by Additional Registrar (Judicial) Nazar Abbas, who wrongly designated cases for the Constitution bench of the Supreme Court instead of the regular one. Subsequently, a two-judge bench comprising Justice Shah and Justice Aqmed Ahmed Abbasi issued a notice to Abbas. Since another recorder filed an answer to the show cause notice with the court, asking to withdraw it and stating that there was no disobedience to the court order, the court reserved its decision on the contempt case. This was followed by an ICA filed by Abbas against a show case notice against him for contempt of court and prayed that the SC stay the contempt proceedings against him pending the decision of the appeal in the courts. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court has constituted a six-member larger bench headed by Justice Mandokhail to hear Abbas’s case on January 27 (Monday) at 1 pm. The bench also includes Justice Mazhar, Justice Athar Minallah, Justice Syed Hassan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Shahid Waheed and Justice Mussarat Hilali. However, Justice Shah now objected to the six-judge bench, saying that Justice Mandokhail and Justice Mazhar “cannot be members of the bench as the decisions of both the committees are in contempt”. In his letter, Chief Justice Puisne said he communicated his objection in the court list issued by the registrar after the approval of two members of the committee constituted under the SC (Practice and Procedure) Act, 2023 through WhatsApp. The judge recalled that Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Yahya Afridi had convened an informal meeting – after the Pakistan Commission meeting – in his chambers. During the meeting attended by the CJP, Justice Shah and Chief Constitutional Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan-Judge Sr. Puisne noted that it was agreed that a larger bench would be set up for the ICA hearing and recommended and recommended a bench of five judges in order of seniority with the exception of those who could not hear the appeal due to a conflict of interest. “Later that night at 9.33pm I received a WhatsApp message from my secretary asking for the approval of the proposed six-member bench […] I told my secretary that I will attend it tomorrow as I have some objections. However, at 10:28 p.m., the secretary informed me that the panel had been constituted and the list had been issued by a majority decision of the committee,” Justice Shah’s letter read. The judge continued his objections, stating that he was not given the opportunity to record his opinion on the file because the actual file was never sent to his office and only the majority decided and issued the list. “Therefore, I want this observation to be recorded in the record of the decision of the committee dated January 23, 2025, constituting the larger bench referred to above,” the judge said.
