Appeals on decisions under Article 184(3) to be filed as intra-court appeal: SC

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court through a circular on Thursday stated that any appeal against the decisions taken on petitions moved under Article 184(3) of the Constitution should be filed in the form of an intra-court appeal (ICA).

The circular issued by the registrar office explained, “Section 5 of the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023 provides that an appeal will lie before this court against an order passed by this court while exercising jurisdiction under Article 184(3) of the Constitution.”

“It is hereby circulated for the information of all concerned that such an appeal will be filed before this court in the form an Intra Court Appeal.”

The circular has been issued for the benefit of all advocates-on-record (AoRs), litigants and required them to strictly comply with these directions in letter and spirit, it added.

Section 5 of Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023 provides that an appeal will lie before this court for 30 days, says circular

Under Section 5 of the Act, any appeal against the decisions of the court will lie within 30 days from the order of the court. Such appeal will be fixed before a larger bench of the Supreme Court for hearing within a period not exceeding 14 days.

Such right of appeal will also be available to an aggrieved person against whom an order has been made under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, prior to the commencement of this Act.

Through its Oct 11 short order, the Supreme Court had upheld the law enacted by the PDM coalition government to regulate the affairs of the top court but with a caveat that an appeal provided against a decision taken under Article 184(3) of the Constitution will not be applicable with retrospective effect.

Headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, a full court consisting of all 15 available judges had rejected all the challenges to the Supreme Court (Practice and Procedure) Act 2023.

The short order had also overturned the April 13, 2023 stay granted by an earlier eight-judge Supreme Court headed by former CJP Umar Ata Bandial on the enforcement of the Act, aimed at clipping CJP’s powers.

The Oct 11 short order had rejected by majority of 10 to five judges the petitions while sustaining the Act as constitutional.

In the second part, the decision was split nine to six, explaining Section 5(1) of the Act that deals with granting a right of appeal prospectively is in accordance with the Constitution and to this extent the petitions are dismissed.

Similarly, the third part of the short order by majority of eight to seven deals with the grant of right of appeal from the retrospective effect under Section 5(2) of the Act and was therefore declared to be ultra vires or illegal and to this extend the petitions were accepted.

Through the law, the authority earlier vested with CJP to constitute benches and fix cases instituted under Article 184(3) of the Constitution, an inherent power of the Supreme Court to enforce fundamental right as guaranteed under the Constitution, was devolved to collegiums of three senior judges, including the CJP.

Now if the committee of three judges is of the view that a question of public importance with reference to enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Chapter I of Part ll of the Constitution is involved, it will constitute a bench comprising not less than three judges of the Supreme Court, which may also include the members of the committee for adjudication of the matter.