AGL40▲ 0 (0.00%)AIRLINK129.06▼ -0.47 (0.00%)BOP6.75▲ 0.07 (0.01%)CNERGY4.49▼ -0.14 (-0.03%)DCL8.55▼ -0.39 (-0.04%)DFML40.82▼ -0.87 (-0.02%)DGKC80.96▼ -2.81 (-0.03%)FCCL32.77▲ 0 (0.00%)FFBL74.43▼ -1.04 (-0.01%)FFL11.74▲ 0.27 (0.02%)HUBC109.58▼ -0.97 (-0.01%)HUMNL13.75▼ -0.81 (-0.06%)KEL5.31▼ -0.08 (-0.01%)KOSM7.72▼ -0.68 (-0.08%)MLCF38.6▼ -1.19 (-0.03%)NBP63.51▲ 3.22 (0.05%)OGDC194.69▼ -4.97 (-0.02%)PAEL25.71▼ -0.94 (-0.04%)PIBTL7.39▼ -0.27 (-0.04%)PPL155.45▼ -2.47 (-0.02%)PRL25.79▼ -0.94 (-0.04%)PTC17.5▼ -0.96 (-0.05%)SEARL78.65▼ -3.79 (-0.05%)TELE7.86▼ -0.45 (-0.05%)TOMCL33.73▼ -0.78 (-0.02%)TPLP8.4▼ -0.66 (-0.07%)TREET16.27▼ -1.2 (-0.07%)TRG58.22▼ -3.1 (-0.05%)UNITY27.49▲ 0.06 (0.00%)WTL1.39▲ 0.01 (0.01%)

SJC to ‘widen consultation’ on IHC judges letter, Sindh Constitutional Bench

1248840 7350326 Supreme Judicial Council Updates
Share
Tweet
WhatsApp
Share on Linkedin
[tta_listen_btn]

 

The Supreme Judicial Council has decided to widen consultation on a letter written by six judges of Islamabad High Court, accusing the intelligence agencies of interference in judicial affairs.

The decision was taken during the meeting of top judicial body under the chairmanship of Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Yahya Afridi, said a press release issued by the Supreme Court.

The meeting was attended by Justice Mansoor Ali Shah, Justice Munib Akhtar, IHC Chief Justice Aamer Farooq and Balochistan High Court Chief Justice Muhammad Hashim Kakar.

According to the press release, the council discussed the agenda items regarding amendments to the code of conduct of judges under Article 209(8) of the Constitution and letter of six judges of Islamabad High Court.

“The Council considered different options and modalities in this regard and decided to widen the consultation on the subject as the code applies to the heads of different institutions in addition to judges and decided to take up the matter in the next meeting once again,” it stated.

Meanwhile, the top judicial body — in Friday’s meeting — also examined ten complaints against the judges under Article 209 of the Constitution filed by different people and held that “no substantial evidence

Related Posts

Get Alerts