ZAFAR HUSSAIN BHATTI vs LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE R — 2025 PLC(CS) 624 PUNJAB-SUBORDINATE-JUDICIAL-SERVICE-TRI

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

ZAFAR HUSSAIN BHATTI VS LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE R.6(3)---Judicial Officer---Bail granting order, passing of---Inefficiency and misconduct, allegation of---Powers and conduct of Judicial Officer---Scope---Appellant assailed orders whereby his request for grant of pro forma promotion as District and Sessions Judge was declined---Allegation against appellant was that while posted as Additional District and Sessions Judge he granted post arrest bail to an accused in case /FIR registered under S.9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, relating to 15-1/2 kilograms Charas, which was an order passed beyond jurisdiction and amounted to inefficiency and misconduct---Held, that a judicial officer while hearing a case is at liberty to decide the same by applying law on the facts thereof based on the available record--- A decision passed by any judge may ultimately turn out to be wrong and be set aside by higher judicial forum---The erroneous exercise of judicial power resulting into passing of an order on the basis of incorrect application of law, however cannot and should not cast doubt on the integrity of the judicial officer---Quality of a judgment / order passed by a judicial officer can only be judged in appellate judicial proceedings and ordinarily not through disciplinary proceedings unless the extraneous considerations for which a judgment / order was passed are proved through cogent material brought before the inquiry officer---Inquiry officer / hearing officer while conducting disciplinary proceedings cannot act as the appellate / revisional forum over the judgments / order passed by the judicial officer---Judicial independence of subordinate judiciary is required to be observed and respected at all costs and the inquiry officer/hearing officer must tread extremely cautiously in such matters otherwise it would put a chilling effect on the working of the subordinate judiciary in performing their judicial functions freely and fairly---In the absence of any evidence it would not be fair to suggest that bail granting order passed by the judicial officer appellant was based on malice---Malice cannot be presumed on the basis of surmises and conjectures---In the present case, there was no supporting material to establish any extraneous considerations on the part of the appellant to have passed the order which was the subject matter of the inquiry---Impugned order was passed on the allegations of inefficiency and misconduct but no efforts were made to substantiate these allegations by way of a detailed inquiry, especially in view of stance of appellant that he secured outstanding PERs throughout his service career and received no adverse remarks of misconduct or being inefficient---Thus, the allegations of inefficiency and misconduct were also not proved, hence, impugned orders were unsustainable in the eye of law---Tribunal allowed the appeal against the orders imposing penalty of withholding promotion for a period of three years retrospectively and declining pro forma promotion to the appellant---Appeal was allowed, in circumstances.

ZAFAR HUSSAIN BHATTI vs LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE R — 2025 PLC(CS) 624 PUNJAB-SUBORDINATE-JUDICIAL-SERVICE-TRIBUNAL

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLC