- Justice Farukh Irfan Resigns..پانامہ اکاؤنٹس والا جج فرخ عرفان کون ہے اور اس نے کیوں استعفیٰ دیا

Enlightened10

Minister (2k+ posts)
See in the news below that How BADNAAM
12k
E ZAMANA EX CJ IFTIKHAR CHAUDHRY WHO WAS STOOGE OF NAWAZ SHARIF WAS DEFENDING THIS JUDE
ALSO
SEE HOW CORRUPT LAWYERS MAFIA TRIED TO PROTECT THIS JUDGE AND LAUNCHED AN APPLICATION IN THE BELOW NEWS
https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2019/03/09/top-judicial-forum-to-hear-lhc-judges-case-on-march-11/
Top judicial forum to hear LHC judge’s case on March 11
BY NEWS DESK , (LAST UPDATED MARCH 9, 2019)

The Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) will take up a complaint of misconduct against Lahore High Court (LHC) Justice Farrukh Irfan Khan on March 11.
Justice Khan is facing a reference as his name surfaced on the list of those having offshore properties in the 2016 Panama Papers leaks. He was also accused of indulging in money laundering and was issued a show-cause notice by the SJC in February 2017.
The five-judge council headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Asif Saeed Khosa is the only constitutional forum invoked under Article 209 of the Constitution for removing superior court judges.
Earlier, the hearing had been fixed for March 4 but was extended.
After the retirement of ex-chief justice Mian Saqib Nisar, it is going to be the first time that CJ Asif Saeed Khosa would be presiding over the council in LHC judge’s matter.
On January 14, the SJC rejected a request by former chief justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry to constitute a commission for recording his evidence. In its last order, the SJC recalled that Justice Chaudhry had voluntarily filed his affidavit but was not forthcoming for cross-examination.
Justice Chaudhry had requested the council to appoint the commission through senior counsel Hamid Khan.
“We decline the request as we do not find it expedient to appoint the commission,” then CJP observed, adding that the affidavit would only be treated if the former CJP came forward for cross-examination.
In his affidavit, Justice Chaudhry had defended Justice Farrukh Irfan Khan by saying that he did not receive any complaint against him from any person, bar, judge or the LHC chief justice during his tenure as the chief justice of Pakistan, and that the sitting judge was not short-tempered or disrespectful to lawyers, litigants or government officials.
On the contrary, the ex-CJP said that during his tenure as judge of the high court, Justice Khan conducted himself with the highest dignity and his elevation and working as a judge added to the respect and decorum of the institution.
Justice Khan, he said, had a good reputation among his fellow judges, lawyers and litigants as an upright, honest, hard-working and dedicated judge.
On the last date of hearing, the SJC had also rejected a representation signed by a number of members of the Punjab Bar Council in favour of Justice Khan.?, the counsel for LHC judge had informed the SJC that four defence witnesses, who had to depose before the council, were still abroad.
Hamid Khan had requested the SJC to postpone the proceedings for two weeks, but when the ex-chief justice asked then chief justice-designate Asif Saeed Khosa, the latter suggested not giving an exact date for the next hearing.
The LHC judge in his reply claimed that no tax was ever evaded by him.
It is also contended that there was no requirement of disclosure of foreign properties to Pakistan tax authorities and the properties in Orlando, Florida were mortgaged before his elevation as a LHC judge and through a gift deed dated February 3 2010; those properties were gifted to his brother Muhammad Ahmad Irfan Khan.
 
Last edited:

Enlightened10

Minister (2k+ posts)
https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2019/03/09/top-judicial-forum-to-hear-lhc-judges-case-on-march-11/
Top judicial forum to hear LHC judge’s case on March 11
BY NEWS DESK , (LAST UPDATED MARCH 9, 2019)

The Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) will take up a complaint of misconduct against Lahore High Court (LHC) Justice Farrukh Irfan Khan on March 11.
Justice Khan is facing a reference as his name surfaced on the list of those having offshore properties in the 2016 Panama Papers leaks. He was also accused of indulging in money laundering and was issued a show-cause notice by the SJC in February 2017.
The five-judge council headed by Chief Justice of Pakistan Asif Saeed Khosa is the only constitutional forum invoked under Article 209 of the Constitution for removing superior court judges.
Earlier, the hearing had been fixed for March 4 but was extended.
After the retirement of ex-chief justice Mian Saqib Nisar, it is going to be the first time that CJ Asif Saeed Khosa would be presiding over the council in LHC judge’s matter.
On January 14, the SJC rejected a request by former chief justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry to constitute a commission for recording his evidence. In its last order, the SJC recalled that Justice Chaudhry had voluntarily filed his affidavit but was not forthcoming for cross-examination.
Justice Chaudhry had requested the council to appoint the commission through senior counsel Hamid Khan.
“We decline the request as we do not find it expedient to appoint the commission,” then CJP observed, adding that the affidavit would only be treated if the former CJP came forward for cross-examination.
In his affidavit, Justice Chaudhry had defended Justice Farrukh Irfan Khan by saying that he did not receive any complaint against him from any person, bar, judge or the LHC chief justice during his tenure as the chief justice of Pakistan, and that the sitting judge was not short-tempered or disrespectful to lawyers, litigants or government officials.
On the contrary, the ex-CJP said that during his tenure as judge of the high court, Justice Khan conducted himself with the highest dignity and his elevation and working as a judge added to the respect and decorum of the institution.
Justice Khan, he said, had a good reputation among his fellow judges, lawyers and litigants as an upright, honest, hard-working and dedicated judge.
On the last date of hearing, the SJC had also rejected a representation signed by a number of members of the Punjab Bar Council in favour of Justice Khan. Interestingly, most of the lawyers belonged to Hamid Khan Group.
Hamid Khan, the counsel for LHC judge had informed the SJC that four defence witnesses, who had to depose before the council, were still abroad.
Hamid Khan had requested the SJC to postpone the proceedings for two weeks, but when the ex-chief justice asked then chief justice-designate Asif Saeed Khosa, the latter suggested not giving an exact date for the next hearing.
The LHC judge in his reply claimed that no tax was ever evaded by him.
It is also contended that there was no requirement of disclosure of foreign properties to Pakistan tax authorities and the properties in Orlando, Florida were mortgaged before his elevation as a LHC judge and through a gift deed dated February 3 2010; those properties were gifted to his brother Muhammad Ahmad Irfan Khan.
 

stargazer

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Justice Farrukh Irfan should be punished in the most harsh way and SC must set an example.

Yeh gand to saaf kerna he paray ga aisay ya waisay.
 

shaheenzafar

MPA (400+ posts)
اس نے استعفی دے دیا جوڈیشیل کونسل نے کاروائی ختم کردی
کیا جوڈیشیل کونسل ججوں کے معاملہ میں اپنے عدالتی بھائیوں کی کرپشن پر ان سے نہیں پوچھ سکتی کہ پیسہ کہاں سے آیا اور کب اور کیوں کمپنی بنائی
اگر کونسل ججوں کو یہ سہولت دے سکتی ہے تو پھر عدالت کو چاہیئے وہ ہر مجرم کو ایسی سہولت دے​
 

Eyeaan

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Resignation should not be accepted. He should be firee and disgraced through the Supreme Judicial Council, which is currently hearing his case.
Resignation is the best and accepted way of resolving such issues. Most (except 3-4 ?) SJC cases have resulted in resignation to end the probe in Pak history. It is good for the courts and judicial system. System is weakened with many forcibly removed judges. A judge makes several decisions during his/her career and when a judge is removed, all of his decisions become controversial , especially if they go for appeals in a higher court. Further reputation and the prestige of the court is harmed. The justice system stands on the trust on judges and courts - and a few black sheep and criminals ought not tarnish the court's reputation for long.

SJC is is primarily concerned with misconduct in the courtroom, especially what materially affects the fair trials, and the integrity of judge in and outside courtroom.
It is NOT a criminal trial court that would punish anyone other than to remove a fellow judge from the post. -
 
Last edited:

Scholar1

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Resignation is the best and accepted way of resolving such issues. Most (except 3-4 ?) SJC cases have resulted in resignation to end the probe in Pak history. It is good for the courts and judicial system. System is weakened with many forcibly removed judges. A judge makes several decisions during his/her career and when a judge is removed, all of his decisions become controversial , especially if they go for appeals in a higher court. Further reputation and the prestige of the court is harmed. The justice system stands on the trust on judges and courts - and a few black sheep and criminals ought not tarnish the court's reputation for long.

SJC is is primarily concerned with misconduct in the courtroom, especially what materially affects the fair trials, and the integrity of judge in and outside courtroom.
It is NOT a criminal trial court that would punish anyone other than to remove a fellow judge from the post. -
You are wrong that there are few black sheep's in judges .. our judiciary is full of black sheeps..