DECEMBER 9, 2022

Writ Jurisdiction cannot be Exercised in favor of a petitioner who conceals Material Facts --- Islamabad High Court, Islamabad

post-img

Writ Jurisdiction cannot be Exercised in favor of a petitioner who conceals Material Facts --- Islamabad High Court, Islamabad

 

Islamabad 10-10-2024: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) has dismissed a Writ Petition filed by Muhammad Nadeem Sajid, Deputy Director of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), citing the concealment of material facts as a basis for the decision. The judgment, delivered by Mr. Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, emphasized that suppression of material facts and non-disclosure of pending litigation constitutes an abuse of the judicial process, disqualifying the petitioner from seeking relief under the Court’s discretionary jurisdiction.

 

The petitioner challenged four show cause notices and subsequent notices for personal hearings issued by NAB on 03.01.2020, 23.02.2022, and 13.12.2023. The notices had proposed the imposition of a major penalty, including dismissal from service. However, the Court found that the petitioner had failed to disclose a pending petition in the Sindh High Court challenging the first of these show cause notices [C.P.No.D-1604/2020]. The Court noted that this omission in the current Writ Petition amounted to a deliberate attempt to mislead the Court.

 

The Court highlighted that the petitioner’s failure to disclose previous litigation involving the same subject matter disqualified him from seeking relief under Article 199 of the Constitution, which is discretionary in nature. “A litigant who approaches the Court for discretionary relief must candidly and forthrightly narrate all material facts,” stated Mr. Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb. The Court also referred to various precedents, including Sajjad Ahmad Vs. Chairman, Capital Development Authority (2016 CLC 896) and Abdur Rashid Vs. Pakistan (1969 SCMR 141), to underline that writ jurisdiction cannot be exercised in favor of a petitioner who conceals material facts.

 

Mr. Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb cited multiple cases, such as Muhammad Saddiq Vs. Ruqaya Khanum (PLD 2001 Karachi 60), which emphasize that concealment of facts in judicial proceedings is tantamount to an abuse of the legal process and bars petitioners from receiving equitable relief. “Constitutional jurisdiction is not to be exercised in favor of a petitioner who has concealed material facts,” the judgement stated.

 

The Court also addressed the petitioner’s attempt to exclude one of the show cause notices (dated 03.01.2020) from the scope of the current Writ Petition, a suggestion made after the concealment was brought to light. The Court rejected this proposal, stating that a petitioner who has not come to Court with “clean hands” cannot seek the Court’s indulgence.

 

As a consequence of the petitioner’s conduct, the IHC imposed a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- and dismissed the petition. The Court’s decision underscores the importance of transparency and full disclosure in legal proceedings and serves as a reminder that the Courts will not entertain attempts to mislead or abuse the judicial process.

 

The dismissal of this Writ Petition sets a significant precedent for the treatment of similar cases in the future, reinforcing the principle that judicial relief will only be granted to those who present their cases with honesty and integrity.

Powered by Froala Editor

Related Post