Tue, 21-Oct-2025

Google Ads | Google Ads | Google Ads | Google Ads | Google Ads | Google Ads | Google Ads | Google Ads

PHC quashes Qaiser’s plea challenging FIA inquiry in prohibited funding case

PHC Asad Qaiser

PHC quashes Qaiser’s plea challenging FIA inquiry in prohibited funding case

Peshawar High Court (PHC) on Tuesday quashed the petition of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Asad Qaiser, in which he challenged the Federal Investigation Agency’s (FIA) inquiry against him in the prohibited funding case.

A PHC bench headed by Justice Lal Jan delivered a short verdict, while the court also directed the FIA to continue the inquiry. Asad Qaiser’s lawyer said that he will approach the Supreme Court against the verdict of the PHC.

It merits mention here that former Speaker of the National Assembly Asad Qaiser was summoned by the FIA in the prohibited funding case, against which he approached the Peshawar High Court, while after the lawyers for the parties had completed their arguments regarding the jurisdiction of the FIA, the court had reserved the decision.

[embedpost slug=”keep-the-courts-away-from-political-matters-in-future-remarks-justice-athar-minallah/”]
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court on Tuesday annulled the Peshawar High Court’s decision to ban the export of poultry products.

A two-member SC bench comprising Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan and Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi heard the case filed by the Federal Government and Sadiq Poultry company against the PHC order.

During the course of proceedings, Advocate Sardar Latif Khosa argued that the high court had no authority to take a suo moto notice. Import and export policy formulation and fixation of pricing was the government’s authority and not that of the court, he added.

The Federal Government also supported the petitioner’s stand against the PHC order.

After a brief hearing of the case, the Supreme Court allowed the appeals of Sadiq Poultry and the government and declared the decision of the Peshawar High Court as null and void.

The apex court observed in its order that the detailed reasons would be issued later.