Pakistan high court judge found with fake law degree after serving five years on the bench

A sitting judge of the Islamabad High Court has been removed after the court found that he had been delivering judgments for years on the basis of a fake law degree. In a detailed 116-page ruling issued on February 23, the court declared the appointment of Justice Tariq Mahmood Jahangiri “void ab initio”, meaning invalid from the very beginning, after verifying university records that showed his educational credentials were fraudulent.

Five years on the bench, then removal

According to a report in Dawn, Justice Tariq Mahmood Jahangiri was appointed as a judge of the Islamabad High Court in December 2020. However, he was barred from performing judicial duties in September last year when questions about his qualifications surfaced.

Now, the same court has formally removed him from office after concluding that his law degree was never valid in the first place.

University records expose fake enrolment and cheating

The High Court based its decision on original records provided by the Karachi University Registrar. The records showed a pattern of impersonation, cheating and misuse of another student’s identity.

The judgement noted that Jahangiri sat for the exam in 1988 using a fake enrolment number. He was caught cheating in the exam, and in 1989, the university banned him for three years.

Instead of accepting that punishment, he tried again in 1990 under a different name, “Tariq Jahangiri”, and used an enrolment number assigned to another student, Imtiaz Ahmed.

Law college denies ever admitting him

The court also examined records from Government Islamia Law College. Its principal told the court that Jahangiri “was never admitted” to the institution.

This finding strengthened the court’s conclusion that his entire legal education record was fabricated.

Court rejects delay tactics, shifts burden of proof

The judgement says that Jahangiri was given several chances to present original documents and submit a written reply, but he failed to do so.

Instead, he filed applications seeking a full bench, asked for the recusal of the chief justice, and requested an indefinite adjournment, citing related proceedings before the Sindh High Court.

The bench described these moves as “dilatory tactics” and said that once the petitioner produced evidence, the burden shifted to Jahangiri to prove his qualifications. His failure to produce proof led the court to draw an adverse inference against him.