IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Original Jurisdiction) 
 
 
Present: 
Mr. Justice Jawwad S. Khawaja 
Mr. Justice Khilji Arif Hussain 
 
 
CIVIL PETITION NO.2255/2010 
                                                       Moulvi Iqbal Haider 
Vs. 
Federation of Pakistan, thr. M/o Law & Justice etc.) 
 
AND 
 
Constitution Petition No.14/2013 
 
 
 
Lahore High Court Bar Association thr. Its President 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Vs. 
 
 
 
General (R) Parvaiz Musharraf and another  
 
AND 
 
Constitution Petition No.16/2013 
 
 
 
Barrister Amjad Malik, Chairman Association of Pakistani   
 
 
 
Lawyers (England) 
 
 
 
 
 
     Vs. 
 
 
 
General (R) Parvaiz Musharraf 
 
AND 
 
Constitution Petition No.17/2013 
Sheikh Ahsan ud Din, ASC  
 
 
Vs 
Federation of Pakistan and others 
 
AND 
 
Constitution Petition No.18/2013 
 
 
 
Abdul Hakeem Khan, ASC, former Chairman PBC 
 
 
 
 
 
          Vs. 
 
 
 
General (R) Parvaiz Musharraf, etc. 
 
 
 
For the petitioner (s) 
(In CP 2255/2010) 
 
Mr. A. K. Dogar, Sr. ASC 
Syed Zafar Abbas Naqvi, AOR 
 
 
 
For the petitioner (s) 
(In Const. P. 14/2013) 
 
Mr. Hamid Khan, Sr. ASC 
 
 
 
For the petitioner (s) 
(In Const. P. 16/2013) 
 
Nemo 
 
 
 
For the petitioner (s) 
(In Const. P. 17/2013) 
 
Sheikh Ahsanuddin, ASC 
 
 
 
For the petitioner (s) 
(In Const. P. 18/2013) 
 
Mr. Muhammad Ikram Ch. Sr. ASC 
Syed Safdar Hussain, AOR 
CP 2255 of 2010 etc. 
 
 
2
 
 
 
For the respondent (s) 
 
N.R. (In all cases) 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 
08.04.2013 
 
ORDER 
 
Jawwad S. Khawaja, J. We have before us 5 cases. Civil Petition No. 2255/2010 is a 
petition which impugns the judgment of the Sindh High Court dated 14.10.2010. It has been 
filed by one Moulvi Iqbal Haider who was petitioner before the Sindh High Court. His case 
is that although the Sindh High Court did proceed to hold that “the proclamation of PCO 
dated 3.11.2007, promulgated by Rtd. General Pervaiz Musharraf clearly shows that … he is the 
person who is responsible for abrogation and subversion of the Constitution”, the Court chose not 
to issue any direction to the Federal Government for initiating proceedings under Article 6 
read with the provisions of the High Treason (Punishment) Act, 1973 against General Rtd. 
Pervaiz Musharraf (Respondent No.4). The High Court observed that “it would be proper for 
the petitioner to approach and make such prayer before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan and 
seek directions in this regard”.  
2. 
Mr. A. K. Dogar, Sr. ASC has contended that in terms of the judgment of the High 
Court dated 14.10.2010 and in view of the clear findings of this Court recorded in the 
judgment in the case titled Sindh High Court Bar Association v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 
2009 SC 879), an order needs to be issued directing the initiation of legal proceedings 
against General Rtd. Pervaiz Musharraf and others. 
3. 
The other 4 petitions have been filed respectively by the Lahore High Court Bar 
Association (Const. P.14/2013), Barrister Amjad Malik, Chairman Association of Pakistani 
Lawyers England (Const. P. 16/2013), Sheikh Ahsan-ud-Din Advocate Supreme Court 
(Const. P. 17/2013) and Abdul Hakeem Khan Advocate Supreme Court, former Vice 
Chairman Pakistan Bar Council (Const. P.18/2013). These petitions also seek initiation of 
proceedings inter alios, against General Rtd. Pervaiz Musharraf under Article 6 of the 
Constitution read with the High Treason (Punishment) Act, 1973 for having committed 
high treason. In Constitution Petition No. 16 of 2013, the petitioner, who has filed the 
petition in person, has not appeared. We, however, note that the case was listed through a 
supplementary cause list issued yesterday i.e. Sunday 7.4.2013. It is also not clear that the 
CP 2255 of 2010 etc. 
 
 
3
petitioner, who is resident in the UK, has been given intimation of today’s hearing. Notice 
to the petitioner in Const. P. 16 of 2013, shall be repeated. 
4. 
In the remaining cases, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners have drawn 
the attention of the Court to a number of paragraphs from the judgment of a 14-Member 
Bench of this Court in the case of Sindh High Court Bar Association v. Federation of Pakistan 
supra. For ease of reference, relevant extracts from these paragraphs are reproduced as 
under:- 
“6.  
On 22.7.2009 a notice was issued to General Pervez Musharraf (Rtd.) on 
his available address intimating him about the proceedings in this case 
and 29.7.2009 as the date fixed therein before this Court … The factum 
of issuance of the afore-referred notice was widely televised through 
National and International T.V. channels. Also, it was widely published 
in National and International print media, but, on the date so fixed no 
one entered appearance. 
 
… 
56. 
 Each member of the Armed Forces, as per his oath under the Third 
Schedule to the Constitution in pursuance of Article 244, is bound to 
bear true faith and allegiance to Pakistan and uphold the Constitution 
which embodies the will of the people. He is also sworn not to engage 
himself in any political activities whatsoever … We agree with the 
contention of the learned counsel that General Pervez Musharraf failed 
to abide by his oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. The 
Constitution was framed to continue to be in force at all times. By 
Article 6, an in-built mechanism was provided to safeguard the 
Constitution from its abrogation or subversion by anyone, that is to say, 
it could neither be cancelled by anyone nor could it be overthrown or 
undermined by anyone in any manner or mode whatsoever. 
 
… 
85.  
In the light of the above discussion, the actions of General Pervez 
Musharraf dated 3rd November, 2007, viz., Proclamation of Emergency, 
PCO No. 1 of 2007 and Oath Order, 2007, etc. are held and declared to 
be unconstitutional, illegal, mala fide and void ab initio.     
 
… 
100.  
… that the holding in abeyance of the Constitution and/or making 
amendments therein by any authority not mentioned in the Constitution 
otherwise than in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the 
Constitution itself, is tantamount to mutilating and/or subverting the 
Constitution … It should be noted that Articles 6 and 237 were framed 
in the backdrop of the successive abrogation of the Constitutions and 
CP 2255 of 2010 etc. 
 
 
4
imposition of martial laws in the country from time to time by the 
General commanding the Army at his will and whim.  
  
5. 
Learned counsel for the petitioners have also referred to a resolution passed by the 
Senate of Pakistan on 23.1.2012. The relevant part of this resolution is as under:- 
“Therefore, the House resolves that for these amongst other facts, reasons, 
acts, breaches and grounds, that: 
a) He [General Rtd. Pervaiz Musharraf] be arrested immediately on arrival 
in Pakistan; 
b) That the Federal Government institutes a case under Article 6 of the 
Constitution against him”. 
 
6. 
Considering the above and also noting the submissions advanced on behalf of the 
petitioners pointing to the act of high treason allegedly committed by General Rtd. Pervaiz 
Musharraf and others, it has been contended before us that it was the bounden duty and 
obligation of the Federation to take affective legal measures and to initiate a criminal case 
against General Rtd. Pervaiz Musharraf and others, who had inter alia, subverted the 
Constitution. It has further been submitted that the Federation rather than initiating action 
against such persons and instead of acting in accordance with the resolution of the Senate 
dated 23.1.2012, has inexplicably, accorded treatment to General Rtd. Pervaiz Musharraf, 
which is unusual and is normally provided to persons who are commonly referred to as 
VIPs. It was contended that the Federal Government had thus not fulfilled its constitutional 
obligation. 
7. 
We have heard learned counsel for the above referred petitioners. It is necessary to 
issue notice to the respondents in these petitions before proceeding further. The office shall 
ensure service of notice on the respondents for tomorrow i.e. 9.4.2013. The Inspector 
General of Police, Islamabad shall serve notice on the respondent General Rtd. Pervaiz 
Musharraf who is statedly within the Islamabad Capital Territory. 
8. 
The Counsel representing the petitioners particularly Mr. A. K. Dogar and Mr. 
Hamid Khan have submitted that the respondent General Rtd. Pervaiz Musharraf be taken 
into custody to ensure that he remains available within the country for the purpose of trial 
under Article 6 of the Constitution read with the provisions of High Treason (Punishment) 
Act, 1973. We are, however, of the opinion that in the first instance, notice of these petitions 
be served on the said respondent for tomorrow. The Inspector General of Police, Islamabad 
CP 2255 of 2010 etc. 
 
 
5
and, if necessary, the Inspectors General of Police in the Provinces, shall ensure service on 
the aforesaid respondent. The Secretary, Interior shall also make sure that if the name of the 
aforesaid respondent General Rtd. Pervaiz Musharraf is not already on the Exit Control 
List, this shall be done forthwith and a compliance report of this order shall be submitted in 
Court during the course of the day. The Federation and all its functionaries shall also 
ensure that the respondent does not move out of the jurisdiction of Pakistan until this order 
is varied/modified. 
9. 
To come up for hearing tomorrow i.e. 9.4.2013.    
 
 
 
 
 
Judge  
 
Judge  
Islamabad 
08.04.2013 
A. Rehman 
Not approved for reporting.