Division Bench compromising CJ Dogar, Justice Azam declares Justice Jahangiri’s appointment illegal
Judge Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri. Photo courtesy: IHC
The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday formally denotified Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri over issues relating to his law degree.
A division bench, headed by Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar and Justice Muhammad Azam Khan, ruled that Justice Jahangiri did not hold a valid degree at the time of his appointment and declared his appointment “illegal”.
The judiciary ordered him to immediately leave office and ordered the Ministry of Justice to formally dismiss him from the judiciary. “He held an invalid law degree at the time of his nomination and confirmation as a judge,” the court noted.
The IHC also ruled on all miscellaneous motions related to this case. Judge Jahangiri left the court about half an hour before the verdict was announced.
The controversy surrounding Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri’s law degree began last year when a letter, purportedly from the Controller of Examinations of Karachi University, began circulating on social media. In July, a complaint about his allegedly fake diploma was filed with the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), the top judicial accountability body, which investigates allegations of misconduct against judges.
Read: Justice Jahangiri accuses IHC Justice Dogar of misconduct
Just yesterday, in his application, Justice Jahangiri claimed that the IHC order was passed “without giving him an opportunity to be heard, while individuals who were not parties to the matter were heard on the issue of maintainability”. He argued that this violated his fundamental right to due process guaranteed under Article 10A of the Constitution.
The petition said that the petition filed in the Islamabad High Court challenges his appointment as a judge on the basis of an alleged “invalid LLB degree”, an issue which Justice Jahangiri said involves “controversial questions of fact which cannot be decided by a high court without recording evidence”. He submitted that such matters were within the jurisdiction of a trial court and that “the High Court has no power to record evidence in quo warranto proceedings”.
The petition further notes that the IHC, while declaring the order maintainable, relied on a report submitted by the University of Karachi “without examining its validity or allowing Justice Jahangiri to challenge it”. He added that the University of Karachi’s procedures and decisions regarding his degree, including actions taken by its unfair means committee, its union and subsequent statements, “are already being challenged in the Sindh High Court, where these proceedings have been stayed.”
Justice Jahangiri also stressed that the alleged events regarding his diploma relate to examinations conducted decades ago and that the allegations against him are “purely factual in nature, requiring a full trial”. He denied the allegations and said “his qualifications remained on record throughout his legal career, including his registration as a barrister and his subsequent judicial appointments”.
Through the petition filed by advocate Uzair Bhandari, Justice Jahangiri sought leave to appeal, conversion of the petition to appeal, setting aside the IHC’s December 9 order and dismissal of the writ petition for not maintainable.
Learn more: Judge Jahangiri Challenges IHC Order in Law Degree Case Before FCC
Earlier this year, lawyer Mian Dawood also filed a petition in the Islamabad High Court (IHC) challenging Jahangiri’s appointment.
The case had a prolonged legal trajectory. On September 16, the same IHC Division Court first heard the petition and issued an interim order restraining Justice Jahangiri from exercising his judicial functions until the maintainability of the petition could be determined. The order, issued without notice to the judge, sparked a debate in the legal community over whether a high court could suspend a sitting judge.
The Supreme Court intervened, overturning the restraining order. A five-member constitutional bench, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, has ruled that a high court cannot prohibit a judge from discharging judicial functions while hearing a quo warranto petition. The decision clarified that it only addressed the legality of the interim order, not the merits of the allegations, and ordered the IHC to resolve all preliminary objections and proceed in accordance with the law.
Justice Jahangiri was also among six IHC judges who wrote to the SJC last year, alleging interference by spy agencies in court cases. The letter sparked a wider debate over judicial independence and led to calls for a formal investigation.
