PHC orders action against ACE officials over case registered against judge

BANNU: The Peshawar High Court (PHC) has directed the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government to initiate disciplinary proceedings against anti-corruption establishment (ACE) officials for what it described as abuse of authority in registering a case against serving judicial officer Humayun Dilawar and his family over land transfers linked to a housing scheme in Bannu.

A bench comprising Justice Mohammad Tariq Afridi and Justice Sabitullah Khan also ordered that the first information report (FIR) lodged against Judge Dilawar and his brother Sadiq Dilawar be quashed. The court instructed the provincial chief secretary to place the judgment before the competent authority without delay so that responsibility could be fixed and proceedings started in accordance with the law. The bench had accepted a joint petition filed by Humayun Dilawar and Sadiq Dilawar on May 5, and has now issued a detailed 19-page ruling.

The court said the competent authority must determine responsibility after due process and submit a compliance report to the registrar within 60 days. The judgment examined the ACE inquiry as well as the registration of the FIR in 2024, and held that the material on record did not justify either the registration or continuation of the case.

"In view of the foregoing discussion, the material available on record, when considered cumulatively, fails to disclose any lawful basis for the registration or continuation of the impugned FIR. The record reveals material procedural irregularities, deliberate disregard of relevant facts and a manifest failure on the part of the relevant ACE officials to exercise the diligence, care and objectivity mandated by law,"

The bench held that the inquiry and the FIR appeared to have been launched without lawful justification and in conscious disregard, as well as apparent concealment, of material facts known to the investigators. Continuing criminal proceedings on the basis of such an inquiry would amount to abuse of process and cause grave miscarriage of justice.

Court findings on ACE conduct

Referring to the role of ACE officials, the judgment said the conduct of the relevant director and circle officer prima facie reflected abuse of authority and lack of bona fides in initiating a criminal case against a serving BPS-20 judicial officer of the Islamabad High Court through an inquiry that had no lawful basis and was legally unsustainable.

The petition had initially been filed in September 2024 by Humayun Dilawar, Sadiq Dilawar and their father Dilawar Khan. Dilawar Khan died a few weeks ago while the case was still pending.

The petitioners argued that the FIR was registered on September 9, 2024, at the anti-corruption police station in Bannu on the directions of the PTI-led provincial government, allegedly in reaction to the conviction of PTI founder Imran Khan and his wife Bushra Bibi by Judge Dilawar in the Toshakhana case. Humayun Dilawar was the judge who had convicted former prime minister Imran Khan in that case.

The petitioners were represented by senior lawyer Sawal Nazir Khan, while advocates Shah Khawar and Malik Zeeshan Khan appeared through video link. Sawal Nazir argued that the land in dispute had been owned by the late Dilawar Khan since 1969. He further contended that under the ACE Rules, 1999, prior approval of the chief secretary was mandatory for launching an open inquiry against an officer in BPS-19 or above, and that registration of an FIR against such an officer also required the chief secretary’s permission.

According to the argument placed before the court, no such approval was obtained either for opening the inquiry or for registering the FIR, despite the fact that Humayun Dilawar was serving in Grade 20 at the relevant time.

Sequence of events and inquiry report

While examining the chronology, the bench said the sequence, when read alongside the conviction judgment against Imran Khan, prima facie showed unusual speed in the initiation and completion of proceedings. The court noted that the report that formed the basis of the proceedings did not contain any allegation, reference or material against Humayun Dilawar, who was later named as an accused.

The detailed judgment also referred to a report submitted in November 2025 by an eight-member inquiry committee constituted by the deputy commissioner of Bannu. The committee found that revenue registration records, a demarcation report and a decree issued by a senior civil judge on March 30, 1980, provided sufficient legal basis for the registration deeds in question. It further concluded that the mutations challenged by the ACE appeared to be legally valid and justified.

"The demarcation proceedings revealed that no excess land has been occupied by Dilawar Khan, his sons or CPEC (Central Provincial Elite Community) Residencia,"