ISLAMABAD:
The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) has ruled that the Sindh High Court (SHC) committed “judicial overreach” by exercising suo motu jurisdiction against police officials and interfering with policy guidelines without justification.
Such powers, the FCC stated, are not available to the High Courts under Article 199 of the Constitution.
In a two-page ruling, a two-member FCC board set aside the SHC’s orders dated October 27 and November 3, 2025, passed in Constitutional Petition No. S-1139 of 2025, to the extent that they exercised suo motu jurisdiction against police officials and interfered in political affairs.
“The impugned orders … are set aside as being the result of an assumption of suo motu jurisdiction not vested in the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, as the observations contained therein amount to a judicial overreach,” the judgment said.
During the suit, it was argued before the FCC that the SHC’s directions regarding internal police reforms and monitoring of investigative cases—issued in the exercise of its subpoena power when those cases were not before the court in the petitions under review—constituted a judicial intrusion into executive and administrative functions.
The Sindh Advocate General also argued that the SHC judge committed judicial overreach while issuing the impugned orders and failed to appreciate that as a general rule the courts should refrain from interfering with political guidelines.
The FCC endorsed this position, noting in its order that it was “in full accord” with the submissions of the Sindh Advocate General.
However, the Constitutional Court clarified that the investigations already initiated and the investigations to be conducted against the petitioners in both cases would continue strictly in accordance with the law.
The FCC directed that the pending proceedings should be conducted independently and without being influenced by any observations or directions contained in the orders of the SHC which went beyond the scope of the dispute before the learned Single Judge.
“The investigations initiated and the inquiry to be conducted against the petitioners, in both these petitions, shall continue in accordance with law without being affected by any observation(s)/direction(s) these were outside the lis (dispute) prescribed for the learned Single Judge of the High Court in the constitutional petition,” said the order authored by Justice Hasan Azhar Rizvi.
