The Supreme Court expressed displeasure at former Punjab chief minister Parvez Elahi’s counsel on Thursday for insisting that the order of the Lahore High Court (LHC) barring his arrest be implemented in a case lodged by the Islamabad Police.
A division bench comprising Justice Mansoor Ali Shah and Justice Sardar Tariq Masood directed Elahi’s counsel Barrister Latif Khosa to prepare arguments and adjourned the hearing till next week.
During the proceedings, the court questioned the maintainability of the plea and asked the counsel to explain how a high court could place a blanket ban on a certain person’s arrest.
When Khosa pointed to harassment by the police referring to Elahi’s arrest each time after acquiring bail, the bench questioned the jurisdiction of the LHC’s order over authorities in the Islamabad Capital Territory and pointed out that the cases were separate.
Elahi, who is also a senior Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader and a close aide of former premier Imran Khan, has been arrested multiple times since May 9 and remains embroiled in several criminal cases. On July 14, a single bench of the LHC restrained law enforcement authorities from arresting Elahi in any new, blind or undisclosed case while granting him protective bail in two known cases.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court adjourned the hearing till October 13, in a case against receiving of taxes by the Cantonment Board Karachi from restaurants, banks and poultry farms.
The court also served notice on the Attorney General for Pakistan for assistance in the case. A three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Qazi Faez Isa heard the case regarding the matter.
During the course of proceedings, the chief justice remarked that federal or provincial governments could impose the taxes. He questioned that how cantonment board could impose tax on professionals.
The Additional Attorney General said that the local government was also an elected body and authorized to impose taxes. The chief justice asked that if the tax is imposed on lawyers, then whether it would be collected by local body. Justice Athar Minallah said that the objection was that the local government couldn’t impose tax under Article 163 of the constitution.
The CJP said that we couldn’t ignore the Constitution of Pakistan, adding that how the authorization of tax collection could be given to someone else.
After this, the court adjourned further hearing of the case.
