ISLAMABAD: Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri is likely to appear as a defendant before the Islamabad High Court (IHC) to face accusations that surfaced in a petition that challenged his appointment over a controversy related to his law degree.
A division bench comprising Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar and Justice Muhammad Azam Khan will take up the matter for further proceedings on Monday (tomorrow).
In a detailed written order issued on Dec 9, the IHC held that the question regarding the validity of Justice Jahangiri’s law degree fell squarely within the scope of a writ of quo warranto — his right to hold public office.
The two-member bench ruled that the petition was maintainable and set aside the office objection earlier raised by the registrar.
The bench had also granted Justice Jahangiri three days to respond to the facts unearthed till date.
The registrar’s office served the notice at the judge’s chamber due to time constraints. Sources said court staff of Justice Jahangiri received the notice and submitted it to his chamber. They added that Justice Jahangiri decided to appear before the bench at the next hearing.
While Justice Jahangiri along with four other IHC judges — Justices Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Babar Sattar, Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan, and Saman Rafat Imtiaz — had earlier appeared before the Supreme Court as well on the same matter, it is not yet clear whether his fellow judges will accompany him in the IHC on Monday.
However, lawyers are expected to attend the proceedings to express solidarity with him. According to former president of the Islamabad High Court Bar Association Riasat Ali Azad, he, along with scores of lawyers, will be present in the courtroom during the hearing.
Fake degree controversy
The petition, filed by Advocate Mian Dawood under Article 199 of the Constitution, seeks a judicial determination on whether Justice Jahangiri lawfully holds the office of a high court judge in view of allegations concerning his LLB degree obtained from the University of Karachi (KU).
According to the order, the bench observed that the petitioner had challenged the judge’s eligibility to hold office rather than alleging misconduct.
As such, the matter did not fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of Article 209 of the Constitution, which governs proceedings before the Supreme Judicial Council.
During the hearings, IHC Chief Justice Dogar consistently observed that the petition raised a direct question of qualification, whether the respondent fulfilled the statutory requirements to hold judicial office, which could be examined through a writ of quo warranto. The bench also noted that the SC had already directed the IHC to proceed with the matter in accordance with law.
The court order referred to a report submitted by KU through the Higher Education Commission (HEC), which highlighted several discrepancies in the academic record of the degree in question.
According to the report, a candidate named “Tariq Mehmood” obtained an LLB degree in 1991 under enrolment number 5968. However, university records showed that the same enrolment number had already been issued to another student, Imtiaz Ahmed, in 1987.
The report further stated that the transcript for LLB Part-I was issued in the name “Tariq Jahangiri”, while the inquiry revealed that the judge had also been assigned a separate enrolment number (7124) for the same degree programme. The committee observed that this violated university rules, which allow only one enrolment number for the entire duration of a degree.
According to the inquiry findings, the existence of multiple identities, duplicate enrolment numbers, and conflicting transcripts rendered the academic credentials “invalid”, although the committee stopped short of declaring the degree “bogus”.
The report also noted that the candidate had been debarred for three years in 1988 on grounds of using unfair means but later appeared in examinations under a different name.
The university alleged collusion with staff and impersonation of other enrolled students, following which the results were cancelled and a three-year ban was imposed, effective until 1992.
In its order, the IHC bench reproduced and relied upon several SC judgements — including Abrar Hassan vs Government of Pakistan, Malik Asad Ali vs Federation, and Sindh High Court Bar Association vs Federation — to conclude that a writ of quo warranto could be issued against a judge in matters relating to eligibility.
The bench also referenced the SC’s direction in Justice Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri vs Mian Dawood.
It noted that the apex court had explicitly ordered the IHC to proceed with Mr Dawood’s petition. “Keeping in view the stance of the petitioner that Respondent No. 1 [Justice Jahangiri] possesses an invalid/fake LLB degree, as well as a careful perusal of the report submitted by the University of Karachi through [the] HEC, we deem it appropriate to issue notice to Respondent No. 1 to submit his reply within three days,” the order stated.
Published in Dawn, December 14th, 2025
About the Author
