The Federal Constitutional Court (FCC) has noted that while delaying the unveiling of a reserved order does not invalidate it, such a delay reflects adversely on judicial efficiency and undermines the timely administration of justice.

In a judgement that partly allowed a petition challenging a Sindh High Court (SHC) ruling, the FCC ordered the expungement of certain high court observations.

Referring to the Supreme Court’s ruling in MFMY Industries Limited v Federation of Pakistan, the FCC said high courts are expected to pronounce reserved judgments within 90 days.

If complexities prevent a decision within this timeframe, the matter should be relisted for rehearing and decided within 120 days, it added.

The judgment underscored that expeditious case disposal is essential for an effective justice system, adding that without timely judgments, the very concept of justice is compromised, leaving litigants in prolonged uncertainty.

It also elaborated on the legal framework governing reserved judgments, stating that once a judgment is reserved, it remains within the bench’s exclusive domain until formally pronounced in open court.

Any premature disclosure or leakage of its contents, before it is signed and issued as an official order, constitutes a serious breach of confidentiality and may render the pronouncement invalid, it stated.

Citing procedural rules, including Order X, Rule 1 of the Pakistan Supreme Court Rules, 2025, the FCC highlighted that judgments must be pronounced either immediately after the hearing or on a future date with due notice to the parties.

It stressed that unsigned or prematurely disclosed judgments remain mere drafts and have no legal standing. The court warned that any deviation from established rules and practices—whether by judges, court staff, or parties—could lead to serious consequences.

The consequences include rehearing of the case by a different bench. The FCC reaffirmed that adherence to court rules is mandatory, as these carry the force of law.

The court observed a recent trend of delays in pronouncing reserved judgments, which it said exacerbates the hardship of litigants and erodes public confidence in the judicial system.

It stressed that such practices are unacceptable and must be strictly avoided. The court directed that a copy of the judgment be circulated to all high courts for strict observance of rules governing judicial conduct and decision pronouncement.

The petitioner had approached the court against the June 3, 2021 judgment of the SHC, which had allowed a constitutional petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitution.