KARACHI:
The University of Karachi has cancelled the LLB degree of Islamabad High Court (IHC) judge Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri in view of its syndicate’s last year decision.
Meanwhile, a division bench of the Sindh High Court (SHC) has also dismissed all the petitions challenging the cancellation of the judge’s degree due to non-prosecution.
On August 31, 2024, the University of Karachi’s Syndicate annulled the allegedly “invalid” degree of Justice Jahangiri on the recommendations of the university’s Unfair Means (UFM) Committee. The SHC on September 5, 2024 suspended the university’s decision.
However, the university’s registrar has issued a “declaration” dated September 25, stating that Tariq Mahmood son of Qazi Muhammad Akram had been found guilty of using unfair means in late 80s.
“[He] was debarred for three years to take admission in any university/college and to appear in any university degree examination under Disqualification Circular No 88 of 1989 and was never a student of Islamia Law College Karachi.
“In compliance with the syndicate meeting held on August 31, 2024 vide Resolution No 06, the LLB results and degree of Tariq Mehmood bearing Seat No 22857; Enrollment No AIL-7124/87 is hereby withdrawn and cancelled. This is being issued with the approval of the vice chancellor,” it added.
Separately, the SHC division bench hearing petitions against the syndicate’s August 31 decision issued a written order on Friday, dismissing a set of petitions filed against the cancellation of Jahangiri’s law degree over non-prosecution.
On Thursday, heated scenes were witnessed at the SHC as a division bench comprising Justice Mohammad Karim Khan Agha and Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon declined to entertain Jahangiri’s pleawho appeared in personto become a party to proceedings on pleas, challenging cancellation of his degree.
The bench insisted that it would first hear and decide the maintainability of the petitions.
In its written order, the bench noted that it gave an opportunity of hearing to all the counsels for the petitioners on the question of maintainability of their petitions; however, the counsels deliberately chose not to avail the opportunity and instead walked out of the courtroom while causing a rumpus.
“Such conduct is highly deprecated. The registrar of this Court shall immediately preserve all CCTV recordings and any audio recording of 25.09.2025 both inside and outside of the CB-I Court room.
“Therefore, we have dismissed all the aforementioned petitions for non-prosecution, for the reasons detailed above along with all listed/pending applications,” the order said.
The order said it is for this court to determine how to regulate its own proceedings, and it cannot be dictated to by advocates, adding that the court had decided that the preliminary objections and the question of maintainability shall be decided through a single common order.
“Naturally, if the objections were found to be valid, the question of maintainability might no longer remain relevant. Unfortunately, the learned counsel representing the parties, along with other members of the bar, insisted that their objections be decided first.
“This court informed them that all matters would be heard and decided together as mentioned above. Upon this, all learned counsel for the petitioners left the courtroom, clearly indicating their unwillingness to proceed with these petitions.”
It said the counsels walked out despite being given the opportunity of being heard which, according to them, they deliberately refused to avail. Therefore, their petitions and any listed application are dismissed for non-prosecution.
“Furthermore, they began raising slogans against the judiciary and completely disrupted the decorum of the court. Such conduct is highly unbecoming and not expected from senior members of the legal profession.
“Prima facie, such conduct amounts to contempt of Court. However, by way of indulgence and by showing maximum judicial restraint, we have decided to refrain ourselves from issuing any such notices. It is expected that the concerned counsel should maintain court decorum in future,” it said.
On September 16, a division bench of the IHC comprising Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar and Justice Muhammad Azam Khan stopped Justice Jahangiri from performing his duties as it took up a petition accusing the judge of holding a dubious LLB degree.
The judge challenged the decision in the Supreme Court, whose five-member constitutional bench (CB) led by Justice Aminuddin Khan will hear the case on September 29.
In a petition that he filed in the SHC, Justice Jahangiri claimed that the general context in which the illegal and mala fide cancellation of his LLB degree had taken place was the unflinching judicial independence he has demonstrated.
“Two prominent examples stand out,” the petition noted. “Firstly, the petitioner is one of the six signatories to the letter dated 25.03.2024, written by judges of the Honourable IHC, in which detailed examples were given of interference and surveillance by agencies of the federal government (Respondent No 5), including the installation of surveillance equipment in his house.
“This was such an unprecedented and brazen attack on the independence of the judiciary that the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan instituted Suo Motu Case No 1 of 2024 to look into this invasion and subversion of judicial independence, passed various orders, and the matter is still sub judice.
“Secondly, the petitioner was one of the judges appointed as an Election Tribunal for the Islamabad Territory, and his appointment was rigorously and consistently opposed by the winning candidates of the ruling party, which led to the transfer of cases from the Election Tribunals,” he added.
