Islamabad:
Islamabad High Court’s (IHC) Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan has noticed that he cannot pretend that there is no conflict among Brordomers by the capital’s Supreme Court. He has also repeated his position that no court course appeal can be filed against a preliminary decision by a court.
Earlier, Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan also heard a disdain for the trial against the superintendent in the Adiala prison for not having allowed the former Prime Minister Imran Khan meeting his family members and party leaders despite court decisions
However, the case was transferred to a three-member larger bench-led by IHC functioning Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar-there, the cases disposed of with instructions.
However, Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan began a separate Suo Motu contempt, which continued with IHC’s registrar and others for transferring a case without his permission.
During the hearing of the case on Friday, Justice Khan was told that a division bench of IHC had issued an order to suspend the contempt of him.
“You present the division bench’s order, which effectively limits this court from continuing to the contempt of the trial. This is an obvious overreaction of authority from the division bench,” he said.
According to Justice Khan, it is a regular law that an intra-Court appeal cannot be maintained against a preliminary order from a single judge, and the division bench’s order undermined the authority of a senior manager.
“If I accept this overreaction, why should litigation continue to have confidence in my court? Why would anyone comply with orders issued by my court? Because the moment I issued a message of showing for contempt, a division bench can simply suspend it?” he added.
He added, “Let me make one thing ready. I continued to write the order even though I had to sit alone in this courtroom and pretend as if people were present.”
During the hearing, Justice Khan asked the further and vice presidency why they hid the fact that an intra-court had been filed with appeal. He said a division bench heard the appeal and concluded that he was wrong and that he did not even know the law.
“Are you doing a mockery of IHC? I assured you that there would be no action against you, and yet you still went ahead and filed that intra-costel or were you forced to do so?” He asked.
He said that when the case was brought to the division bench, he was not allowed to present his attitude. He said that a unilateral order was adopted and only after it was adopted was the court informed that the procedure had stopped.
