Thursday December 02, 2021

Justice Faez Isa case: Establish wife’s dependency on petitioner judge, says Supreme Court

June 12, 2020

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court Thursday sought the federation counsel’s assistance in the presidential reference filed against Justice Qazi Faez Isa for allegedly not disclosing his foreign properties in his wealth returns.

The federation counsel’s assistance was sought on allegations of malice connected with the surveillance of the judge and his family as well as collection of material allegedly collected illegally for filing a presidential reference.

A ten-member full court – headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial – resumed hearing on a set of petitions challenging the presidential reference filed against the judge.

Justice Maqbool Baqir, Justice Manzoor Ahmed Malik, Justice Faisal Arab, Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel, Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, and Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah are the other members of the bench. Justice Umar Ata Bandial told the federation counsel Barrister Farogh Naseem that malice was very important in the case, as according to the petitioner judge he and his family was subjected to covert surveillance.

Justice Maqbool Baqir asked Farogh Naseem that he should keep in mind that a democratically elected government had been sacked on charges of surveillance of judges.

“The crux of the instant hearing is that an allegation has been made by the petitioner judge that certain actions have been taken with malice,” Justice Bandial told Naseem. The judge observed that if mala fide intention was established, then it would end the jurisdiction of the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC).

Furthermore, Justice Bandial also told the counsel that if material or evidence was collected illegally for filing of the reference, then he will have to explain as to how the evidence could be relied upon for establishing the case.

Justice Maqbool Baqir told the counsel that it was the basic allegation made in presidential reference that the petitioner judge had violated Section 116 of the Income Tax Ordinance. “You have to establish before us that the judge has violated the law,” Justice Baqir told Naseem. “It’s my promise that I will provide full assistance to the court in this regard,” Naseem replied. Meanwhile, the court adjourned the hearing until today (Friday).