Categories Courts

All eyes are on top court verdict over legality of blocking no-confidence vote against PM Khan

While hearing arguments of PML-N counsel challenging legality of National Assembly’s deputy speaker dismissal of no-confidence motion against prime minister the top court Chief Justice Umar Ata Bandial said the court has nothing to do with matters of state and foreign policy but to examine legality of the speaker office act in the matter.

The NA Deputy Speaker Qasim Suri had linked the motion to a “foreign conspiracy” to topple the PTI government and ruled that the motion was contradictory to Article 5 of the Constitution. Subsequently, the CJP had taken suo motu notice of the matter, following which a larger bench was formed to hear the case.

The five-member bench is headed by the CJP and includes Justice Ijazul Ahsan, Justice Mohammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Munib Akhtar and Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail.

During the hearing of the matter on Tuesday, the CJP said the court would not interfere in policy matters and would focus on the deputy speaker’s ruling, the PML-N’s counsel proposed that the apex court may seek an “in-camera briefing about the foreign conspiracy from the intelligence chief”. “Right now we are looking at the law and Constitution,” the CJP replied, adding that all the respondents would be told to focus on this matter at the moment.

“We prefer that a decision be taken on this matter only,” CJP Bandial said. “We want to see if the court can review the ruling of the deputy speaker.” The court, he added, didn’t interfere in the state or foreign policy. “We don’t want to indulge in policy matters.”

A member of the bench Justice Ahsan expressed the court only wanted to see constitutional matters for now. The PML-N’s counsel, however, argued that the court could judicially review an illegal and unconstitutional move.

Justice Munib Akhtar said the NA and provincial assembly were masters of their respective houses. The distribution of powers was also enshrined in the constitution, the judge added. “We have referred to six court verdicts that clarify the jurisdiction of Article 69,” Khan said adding that the speaker confirmed the deputy speaker’s ruling. He also questioned the transfer of power from the speaker to the deputy speaker. Justice Ahsan said Naeem Bukhari, the counsel for NA Speaker Asad Qaiser, would aid the court on the matter.

Later, the court adjourned the hearing till 11:30am on Wednesday (tomorrow).

Author

More From Author

You May Also Like

Khudayar Mohla, Sindh High Court, SHC Karachi, Federal Investigation Agency, FIA Pakistan, Pest Management Services (Private) Limited, Methyl Bromide import, illegal Indian imports, Justice Adnan Iqbal Chaudhry, Justice Abdul Mobeen Lakho, Enquiry No. ENQ-ACC-KHI-1/26, Imports and Exports (Control) Act 1950, Federal Investigation Agency Act 1974, Agricultural Pesticides Ordinance 1971, Section 160 CrPC, writ petition dismissal, jurisdictional challenge, forged import permits, trade with India, Anti-Corruption Circle Karachi, pesticide import regulations, chemical smuggling investigation, Paras Ali Lodhi, Saddam Hussain Chang, Shazia Hanjra Deputy Attorney General, Department of Plant Protection, Pakistan trade law, industrial chemical enquiry.

SHC Upholds FIA Jurisdiction in Probe into Prohibited Chemical Imports

KARACHI: While dismissing a plea seeking directives against the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), a division…

Khudayar Mohla, Supreme Court Pakistan, Sindh High Court contempt case, contempt of court Pakistan, preliminary hearing requirement, Article 204 Constitution Pakistan, Contempt of Court Ordinance 2003, Supreme Court verdict 2026, SHC orders set aside, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi, Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi, Hira Rauf case, Mushtaq Ahmed case Pakistan, procedural law Pakistan, prima facie case law, contempt proceedings Pakistan, judicial procedure Pakistan, intra court appeal Pakistan, legal lapses in court orders, due process in contempt cases, Pakistan judiciary news, Supreme Court rulings Pakistan, constitutional law Pakistan, legal rights of accused contemnor

SC Sets Aside SHC Verdict, Rules Preliminary Hearing Mandatory Before Framing Charge in Contempt Proceedings

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court has set aside Sindh High Court orders in a contempt matter,…

khudayar Mohla, Justice Jawad Hassan,Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed, Sheikh Rasheed Umrah travel ban, Lahore High Court Rawalpindi Bench, LHC Rawalpindi verdict, Anti-Terrorism Court Pakistan, Section 28-A Anti-Terrorism Act 1997, ATA passport impoundment, Justice Jawad Hassan, Justice Tariq Mahmood Bajwa, Intra Court Appeal Pakistan, ICA No 76 2025, Division Bench LHC, passport impounded by operation of law, freedom of movement Article 15 Constitution Pakistan, reasonable restriction fundamental rights Pakistan, Provincial National Identification List, PNIL Pakistan, Exit Control List Pakistan, ECL Pakistan, no estoppel against law Pakistan, judicial estoppel Pakistan, writ petition LHC, constitutional jurisdiction High Court Pakistan, Additional Attorney General Pakistan, Federal Investigation Agency Pakistan, FIA passport impounding, anti-terrorism law Pakistan, charge-sheeted accused travel ban Pakistan, ATC permission travel abroad, Umrah travel permission Pakistan court, legislative intent Section 28-A, mandatory legal presumption ATA, appellate jurisdiction LHC, Law Reforms Ordinance 1972, Pakistan terrorism trial travel restrictions, criminal justice Pakistan, passport impounding terrorism accused, Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed court case, Sheikh Rasheed Ahmed 2025 2026, LHC sets aside Umrah permission, Pakistan court ruling travel ban, Pakistan High Court anti-terrorism verdict

LHC Rawalpindi Bench Sets Aside Sheikh Rasheed’s Umrah Travel Order, Rules ATC is Sole Authority for Passport Impoundment Under Anti-Terrorism Law

RAWALPINDI: While interpreting the legislative intent behind Section 28-A of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, read…