Removal of case from cause list: IHC judge initiates court contempt proceedings

ISLAMABAD: Justice Ejaz Ishaq Khan of the Islamabad High Court (IHC), Wednesday, initiated contempt of court proceedings over removal of Mishal Yousafzai case from the cause list of his court.

Justice Ishaq initiated the contempt proceedings after a case related to the Adiala Jail Superintendent’s failure to arrange a meeting between the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) founder and his lawyer, Mishal Yousafzai, was removed from the cause list.

The judge, who was originally presiding over the case, questioned the removal and ordered the judicial deputy registrar to submit a written response and further sought a reply from the advocate general of Islamabad regarding the decision to delist the case and transfer it to another bench.

At the onset of the hearing, Justice Ishaq summoned the court’s Deputy Registrar (judicial) Sultan Mehmood and the Islamabad Advocate General at 11am to seek the reasons for the cancellation of cause list.

Upon their appearance, the court asked the AG: are you involved in whatever has happened? When Mehmood arrived, the judge asked him, “On whose directives did you cancel the cause list?”

The deputy registrar replied, “We were issued instructions by the (IHC) Chief Justice’s office, which said that a larger bench has been formed so you may cancel this case’s cause list.”

The judge then asked under which law “miscellaneous application for the case transfer” was filed. He also asked whether the State supports transferring a case without the (presiding) judge’s will. “Instead of doing this, you would have detonated the foundations of my court with explosives,” the judge remarked.

Justice Ejaz then said whether the Chief Justice had the authority to transfer a case pending before another judge without their consent, adding; “what if a chief justice in the future uses this power to arbitrarily transfer cases? Would such a system not encourage corruption and nepotism?

The judge also criticised the interference in judicial proceedings, saying that such actions undermine the principles of justice. He maintained that the IHC rules do not allow a chief justice to transfer a case without the presiding judge’s approval.

Justice Ejaz said it was not a matter of his personality or authority but of the high court’s respect. He asked would the public’s belief in the justice system be maintained in this manner.

He warned: “Whatever you are doing by making this (matter), the matter of ego will tear apart this high court.” He added, “If the State has decided that they have to win an ego war, then there is no point of me sitting here.” He said that the court’s top judge was also bound by the law and could not act on his whims.

Justice Ejaz further remarked that should the judge be at the mercy of the registrar’s office? Will the (registrar’s) office decide which judge hears a case? He also warned that the ongoing actions amounted to contempt of court.

The deputy registrar judicial responded by saying that the matter had been referred to the chief justice’s office for guidance, which then decided to transfer the case to a larger bench.

Advocate Shoaib Shaheen noted that neither the State nor the prison superintendent were directly affected parties in this matter, questioning the overall fairness of the case.

Lawyer Yousafzai also raised concerns about broader implications, saying: “If this is happening to us in open court, one can only imagine how PTI’s founder and Bushra Bibi are treated in prison.”

Justice Ejaz acknowledged her concerns but emphasised that the integrity of the judiciary was at stake. He observed that a ‘guided missile’ that was directed towards her is now coming for them.

The case was adjourned until today (Thursday).

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025