ARTICLE 185
185. Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court
(1) Subject to this Article, the Supreme Court shall have jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals from judgements, decrees, final orders or sentences of a High Court.
(2) An appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from any judgement, decree, final order or sentence of a High Court—
(a) if the High Court has on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to death or to transportation for life or imprisonment for life ; or, on revision, has enhanced a sentence to a sentence as aforesaid ; or
(b) if the High Court has withdrawn for trial before itself any case from any court subordinate to it and has in such trial convicted the accused person and sentenced him as aforesaid ; or
(c) if the High Court has imposed any punishment on any person for contempt of the High Court; or
(d) if the amount or value of the subject-matter of the dispute in the court of first instance was, and also in dispute in appeal is, not less than one million rupees or such other sum as may be specified in that behalf by Act of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) and the judgment, decree or final order appealed from has varied or set aside the judgment, decree or final order of the court immediately below ; or
(e) if the judgment, decree or final order involves directly or indirectly some claim or question respecting property of the like amount or value and the judgment, decree or final order appealed from has varied or set aside the judgment, decree or final order of the court immediately below; or
(f) if the High Court certifies that the case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.
(3) An appeal to the Supreme Court from a judgment decree, order or sentence of a High Court in a case to which clause (2) does not apply shall lie only if the Supreme Court grants leave to appeal.
— Constitutional jurisdiction — Dismissal of writ petition while adjudicating on an interlocutory application — Scope — Supreme Court addressed a petition filed by the Election Commission of Pakistan against an ad-interim ex-parte order of the Peshawar High Court — The High Court had suspended the ECP’s notification changing the returning officer for a constituency on medical grounds and the officer’s own request — Court found that the change of returning officer was justifiable, as supported by a medical certificate and the officer’s application citing health reasons — Respondents, who challenged the change of returning officer in the High Court, failed to provide a satisfactory reason for their objection (to the change) — The ECP stated that the suspension of the order hindered the scrutiny of nomination papers as scheduled — The Supreme Court not only set aside the interim order but also dismissed the writ petition pending before the High Court and criticized the High Court’s ex-parte order for potentially jeopardizing the election programme. [2024 SCLR 3 = 2024 SCP 3]