IGP Transfer Case: SC Seeks Reply From Azam Sawati On JIT Report

Rukhshan Mir (@rukhshanmir) Published November 29, 2018 | 04:29 PM

The Supreme Court on Thursday directed Federal Minister for Science and Technology, Azam Swati, to submit a written reply in response to the report, submitted by Joint Investigation Team, in suo motu case regarding transfer of Inspector General of Police, Islamabad

ISLAMABAD, (UrduPoint / Pakistan Point News - 29th Nov, 2018 ) :The Supreme Court on Thursday directed Federal Minister for Science and Technology, Azam Swati, to submit a written reply in response to the report, submitted by Joint Investigation Team, in suo motu case regarding transfer of Inspector General of Police, Islamabad.

A three-member bench of the Supreme Court, headed by the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Mian Saqib Nisar, and comprising Justice Faisal Arab and Justice Ijazul Ahsen, resumed hearing of the case.

The JIT was constituted on November 2 to probe alleged abuse of power by the Minister in IGP Jan Mohammad transfer case who was transferred on October 27 after he allegedly refused to take action on a complaint filed by federal minister's son.

The chief justice had constituted the JIT to find out whether Azam Swati was involved in the transfer of IGP or not.

During course of proceedings, Ali Zafar counsel for the Federal Minister pleaded that JIT formed to probe the minister's alleged misconduct had submitted a sealed report before the bench and "I have yet to receive a copy of the report.

" At this, the chief justice remarked, according to the report of the JIT led by National Accountability Bureau's (NAB) Irfan Mangi, the minister misused his powers and he was accorded special treatment.

The Chief Justice, remarked that "why not Mr. Sawati should be trialled under Article 62 (1)(f) of the Constitution who is prima facie, not fit to be the minister of the nation." Ali Zafar pleaded for time to submit detailed response on the report as his client was on an official visit to abroad.

Subsequently, the bench accepting the stance directed the respondent to submitreply till December 4 and adjourned further hearing of the case till then.