Federal Shariat Court Overturns Sindh High Court’s Decision Allowing Student Special Exam, Emphasizes Law Over Sympathy

The Federal Constitutional Court has struck down a Sindh High Court ruling that allowed a student to sit for a special “super supplementary” exam, stressing that courts cannot replace law with personal ethics or sympathy.

The case concerned a student of Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto Medical University who missed the annual exam due to a kidney transplant and also could not appear in the supplementary exam for medical reasons. The student had submitted two requests to the university’s Vice-Chancellor, both of which were rejected. Subsequently, the student approached the Sindh High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution, which granted permission to sit for the special exam.

During the hearing at the Federal Constitutional Court, the bench remarked that judges must decide based on law, not emotions. “Courts cannot replace law with personal morality or sympathy,” the court said. It added that there is no provision in existing laws, rules, or regulations to allow a special super supplementary exam, and high courts cannot issue orders based on feelings of compassion.

The court further stated that judicial decisions cannot be based on personal beliefs or political realities. Judicial credibility lies in enforcing the law, and judges must deliver justice fearlessly and impartially. “Pakistan is a state governed by the Constitution, not individuals. Judges are neutral arbiters, and prioritizing sympathy over legal obligation is a deviation from judicial office,” the verdict noted.

The ruling also clarified that high courts are creations of the Constitution and their powers under Article 199 are limited. They may exercise only the authority explicitly granted by law or the Constitution.

The Federal Constitutional Court’s decision reinforces the principle that law, not individual sentiment or good intentions, governs judicial decisions in Pakistan.