ISLAMABAD: The acting chief justice of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) in an apparent attempt to defuse the recent controversy related to the assigning of the cases did not issue a written order to restrain Justice Babar Sattar from proceeding in the contempt matter.

IHC Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, on the other hand, continued to proceed against the senior officials of the court for transferring a petition related to the visitation of former prime minister Imran Khan to the larger bench.

On April 28, Justice Sattar issued a strongly worded order criticising the registrar’s office for failing to list a matter related to a case related to the removal of the former DG of the Malir Development Authority from the travel restrictions list.

Justice Sattar issued the contempt notices to the director general of immigration and passports and the National Accountability Bureau (NAB).

Justice Ejaz questions legality of case transfer in Imran’s visitation rights plea, summons court officials

The case was not fixed before Justice Sattar on April 28. Instead, it was fixed before the division bench headed by the acting Chief Justice Sardar Mohammad Sarfraz Dogar. Justice Sattar lambasted the deputy registrar (Judicial) for what he described as “prima facie defiance” of court orders, emphasising that ministerial staff cannot override binding judicial commands.

He also noted irregularities in the handling of an intra-court appeal filed against one of his earlier interim orders, warning that the division bench hearing the appeal might not have been properly assisted regarding the limits of intra-court jurisdiction under the Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972.

The order sheet of the division bench issued on Wednesday did not mention any restraining order.

Subsequently, the case will now be heard by Justice Sattar as per the cause list to be issued by the registrar’s office.

In another development, Justice Sardar Ijaz Ishaq Khan has raised serious concerns about transferring the petition related to visitation for Imran Khan.

The judge who was originally hearing the case issued a suo motu order after the matter was abruptly transferred to another bench without explanation.

In a written order, Justice Ijaz Ishaq Khan questioned the legality of the transfer and directed the court’s additional registrar and the deputy registrar to appear in person at the next hearing, scheduled for May 16.

The judge sought a report on how many cases in the past had been transferred to larger benches by chief justices without the consent of the hearing judge.

“The office is directed to produce the original records of any such past transfers in support of its position,” the order stated, emphasising the need for transparency and procedural accountability.

The court also tasked the advocate general with reviewing all relevant precedents and assisting the court in the next hearing.

Recognising the gravity of the matter, the IHC appointed prominent legal experts Faisal Siddiqui and Adeel Wahid as amici.

The court described the issue as one of “utmost importance for the independence of the judiciary and transparency in the delivery of justice.”

The judicial assistants have been directed to review the complete case record and all relevant court orders, which must be provided to them by the registrar’s office within three days.

Published in Dawn, May 1st, 2025