Legal Principle & Question Decided

Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Sindh High Court, officially reported as 2024 SHC 527. In this matter between Const. P. 277/2024 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi - Muhammad Nadeem and Another (Petitioner) and the Respondent, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.

Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.

Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

COURT: Sindh High Court CASE NO: Const. P. 277/2024 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi CITATION: 2024 SHC KHI 527 PARTIES: Muhammad Nadeem and Another (Petitioner) ORDER DATE: 27-MAR-24 BENCH: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam(Author) A.F.R: Yes ------------------------------------------------------------ IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI

CP No.S-277 of 2024 [Muhammad Nadeem and another vs. Sumeira Nadeem Sulemani and others]

Date of hearing : 04.03.2024

Petitioners No.1 and 2 [Muhammad Nadeem and Imtiaz Ali Shah, respectively] : Through Petitioner No.2-Imtiaz Ali Shah, Advocate in person. Respondent No.1 [Sumeira Nadeem Sulemani] : Nemo

Respondent No.2 [The Family Judge-XVI, Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Karachi South]

Respondent No.3 [Additional District Judge-VII, Karachi South]

ORDER

Muhammad Faisal Kamal Alam, J: The matter was reserved for passing of Order on the maintainability of this Petition. 2. The Petitioners have challenged the Order dated 9 th December 2023, inter alia, referring the matter of Petition No.2 to the Disciplinary Committee of th e Sindh Bar Council, and the Order dated 17 th February 2024, passed by the learned Appellate Court in the Family Appeal No.215 of 2023, dismissing the same. 3. The learned Advocate (present Petitioner No.2) has argued that the Petitioner No.1 has filed a G uardian and Ward Application No.2330 of 2022 against the R espondent No. 1, inter alia, seeking custody of the minor, that is, his Son-Muhammad Sahib Nadeem Sulemani, whereas, the Respondent No.1 has f iled a Suit for Dissolution of Marriage through

2

Khula, being Suit No.2256 of 2022; the Petitioner No.2 being Advocate is representing the Petitioner No. 1 in the se C ases; that referring his [Petitioner No.2] matter to the Disciplinary Committee is uncalled for, as the Petitioner No.2 has acted professionally and diligently; although this shows the biasness of the learned Judicial Officer towards the Petitioners; requested that both the Impugned Orders be set-aside. 4. Record considered.

5. It is necessary to mention that from the Record it appears that a Civil Transfer Application No.59 of 2023 is also sub judice in this Court, filed by the present Petitioner No.1 so also a Complaint before the Member Inspection Team about the conduct of the Judicial Officer [the Respondent No.2], who is seized of the above Lis. 6. The Order dated 9 th December 2023 [the impugn ed Order] is perused. It is stated in the s aid Order that since a Transfer Application has been filed, therefore propriety demands that he [the Respondent No.2] should not proceed with the matter, until specific orders are given by this Court [High Court] in the said T ransfer Application, wherein certain allegations are levelled about the conduct of the learned Presiding Officer [the Respondent No.2] . However, during proceeding purported behaviour of the Petitioner No.2 [Advocate] has been mentioned in the impugned Order, of which he is aggrieved of . This was challeng ed in the above Appeal, though unsuccessfully, and the impugned Order dated 17 th February, 2024 dismiss ed the Appeal, inter alia, on the ground that no order has been passed concerning the Case itself, thus, the Order of 9 th December, 2023, is not appealable ; besides, the Appellate Court has restrained itself from entertaining the request of Petitioner No.2 , about expunction of remarks against the latter, as the matter is pending before the MIT [of this Court].

3

7. It is also pertinent to mention that few lines of Paragraph-11 of the present Petition are unnecessary and improperly phrased and need to be deleted. Thus, the O ffice of this Court is directed to Delete with red ink Lines 10 to 15 from the top of this Paragraph-11. 8. Since the issues agitated in the present Constitution P etition are sub judice in the above T ransfer Application, before the MIT and the Disciplinary Committee, therefore, in these circumstances, no interference is required in the impugned Orders, which otherwise are not illegal. 9. Consequently, this Petition is dismissed. It is clarified that any observation mentioned herein above is of tentative nature and will not prejudice the pending proceedings. JUDGE Karachi Dated 07.03.2024 M.Javaid PA

4

Related Legal Research & Directories

• Browse all judgments from Sindh High Court
• Search Pakistani statutes: Constitution of Pakistan 1973, PPC, CrPC, CPC & Family Laws
• Analyze this case with Al Wakeelo AI Legal Assistant