M.D. TAHIR, ADVOCATE vs LAHORE HIGH COURT through Registrar
This matter came before the Supreme Court of Pakistan through a petition challenging the condition of deposit of security imposed by a judge as a condition precedent for taking further proceedings in a writ petition. The core legal question was whether a court can lawfully impose a security deposit condition to proceed with a writ petition. The Supreme Court held that the condition of deposit of security was without lawful authority and unwarranted in law. Consequently, the court accepted the writ petition, establishing the principle that imposing arbitrary financial conditions for pursuing constitutional remedies in writ petitions is legally impermissible.
- Can a court impose a security deposit as a condition precedent for taking further proceedings in a writ petition?
- Is the imposition of a security deposit for pursuing a writ petition warranted in law?
ORDER
1. ' NASIM HASAN SHAH, C.J.---For reasons to be recorded separately the condition of deposit of security imposed by the learned Judge as a condition precedent for taking further proceedings in the writ petition is held to be without lawful authority and to be unwarranted in law. The writ petition succeeds and is accordingly accepted, but with no order as to cost.