At several junctures in 2017, Pakistani courts dominated headlines across media outlets. The role of judiciary was hailed by some, slandered by others — its impact on the country's political and social climate was acknowledged by all.

The verdicts announced saw the country divided in its opinions — particularly in July when the Supreme Court announced its landmark judgement in the Panama Papers case.

Sometimes regarded as controversial, the court's observations and verdicts became the subject of much debate across media and society. While some looked to the judiciary for a moral compass, others criticised it.

Here, Dawn.com looks at 10 important cases that made headlines over the course of the outgoing year.

Panamagate: SC disqualifies PM Nawaz Sharif from holding public office

The year 2017 will be remembered for a number of legal cases that held the country's attention captive, but none as much as the Panama Papers case that started in November 2016.

The first verdict, split 3-2 among the five-judge bench, was announced on April 30 and led to the formation of a joint investigation team (JIT).

Later on July 28, the bench announced its second and final unanimous verdict in the Panama Papers case: Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif could no longer hold public office.

The bench — headed by Justice Asif Saeed Khosa — sent the premier packing under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution.

Explore: Full text of Supreme Court order in Panama Papers case

The court observed that Nawaz had failed to declare an iqama [UAE visa] and a salary of 10,000 dirhams from his son's company in the United Arab Emirates and therefore, was no longer sadiq [truthful] and ameen [trustworthy].

The verdict, a first of its kind, did not go down well with the ruling PML-N and its supporters. Questions were raised on the merits of the grounds for Nawaz's disqualification.

Some, however, felt that a welcome precedent for accountability of the country's elite had been set.

Read more: The technicality that led to Nawaz Sharif's disqualification

The verdict was hailed as a victory by Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf. The opposition party's chief, Imran Khan, had put up a relentless fight, clamouring for Sharif to step down, after the Panama Papers were leaked in April 2016.

Read more: How Pakistan's Panama Papers probe unfolded

A 'counterblast' to Panama: Tareen disqualified, Khan not out

In what was referred to as a 'counterblast' to the petitions filed by Khan against Nawaz in the Panama Papers case, Hanif Abbasi ─ a PML-N leader ─ in November 2016 filed petitions before the apex court seeking the disqualification of Khan and PTI's secretary general, Jahangir Tareen.

Read more: Jahangir Tareen — one of Pakistan's wealthiest lawmakers

On May 3, a three-member apex bench ─ headed by the chief justice ─ began hearing the petitions which accused the two PTI leaders of not declaring their assets to the ECP and sought to unseat them based on alleged violations of the lncome Tax Ordinance 1979 and Peoples Act 1974. The petition also alleged that the PTI was a foreign-funded party.

After more than 50 court hearings, the bench reserved its verdict in the case on November 14 and announced it before a packed courtroom a month later.

The court found Tareen to be dishonest under Article 62(1)(f) of the Constitution ─ the same clause under which Sharif was disqualified months earlier ─ and Section 99 of Representation of People Act (ROPA) on one count among the multiple charges brought against him. The announcement was seen by some quarters as a blow to the party's claims of being morally superior to other political entities.

The apex court, however, dismissed the petition filed against Khan. It was a victory for the PTI chief as he walked free only a few months after his political nemesis was disqualified.

In the days that followed, Nawaz and the PML-N stepped up their criticisms of the apex court, deeming the clean chit for Khan as a "double standard".

A whimper in the courtroom: ATC issues verdict in Benazir Bhutto murder case

Nearly a decade after former prime minister Benazir Bhutto was killed at Liaquat Bagh in Rawalpindi, an anti-terrorism court (ATC) announced its judgment in the case on August 31.

"A cataclysmic event in the country’s history appears to have ended with a whimper in court," Dawn's editorial, published the day after the verdict was announced, had noted.

The court declared former president Pervez Musharraf, who had been named in the case in 2011, an absconder. The retired general, who now lives in Dubai, had repeatedly failed to appear before the court throughout the trial.

Editorial: A controversial verdict

The court also acquitted five Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan suspects of all murder charges while sentencing two police officials — Saud Aziz and Khurram Shahzad — to 17 years in prison. The two were accused of negligence in security arrangements which subsequently led to Bhutto's assassination.

The verdict in a case that was controversially investigated and prosecuted was rejected by the PPP and was regarded as unsatisfactory by several quarters.

On September 18, weeks after the verdict was announced, PPP challenged it in the Lahore High Court. The party's role — or lack thereof — in pursuing the case over the last 10 years did not go unnoticed.

"The PPP government owed it to the nation, its own party and its assassinated leader to identify and prosecute those responsible for her death," Dawn wrote in an editorial. "The laments of PPP leaders today may be real, but so was their conscious decision to turn their back on their slain leader for the sake of power and public office."

Shahzeb Khan case: Murderers get bail after family's pardon

On December 23, a day before Shahzeb Khan's fifth death anniversary, Shahrukh Jatoi and three others accused for the murder of the 20-year-old were granted bail by a district and sessions court.

Jatoi, Sajjad Ali Talpur and Siraj Ali Talpur were released after Shahzeb's father asked the court to completely drop the case against them, arguing that his family had formally pardoned them already. Ghulam Murtaza Lashari was also granted bail.

Read more: Pardon for Shahzeb killers triggers debate

Two days after he had shot Shahzeb four times over a petty dispute, subsequently killing him, Jatoi had fled to Dubai. However, he was brought back to Karachi by police in January 2013 after the then chief justice Iftikhar Chaudhry took suo moto notice of the murder. Later that year, an anti-terrorism court had sentenced Jatoi to death.

In November this year, the Sindh High Court ordered a retrial in the case and revoked the punishments that had been awarded to the accused. The case was transferred to a district and sessions court where, a week later, the accused were granted bail.

It was a disheartening turn of events for many who closely followed the case and took to the streets to ask for justice for Shahzeb. The cold brutality with which Shahzeb was murdered on the night of his sister's valima sent shivers across Pakistan five years ago and has gripped the nation since.

The charges have yet to be dropped against the accused.

Fallout from Panamagate: NAB files references against the ruling Sharif family

On September 8, in keeping with the apex court's orders in the Panama Papers case, the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) filed three references against Nawaz Sharif, his three children, and his son-in-law.

The references were prepared on the basis of the findings of the SC-mandated JIT, which had probed the Sharif family's business dealings abroad during the case.

Read more: A timeline of the Panamagate JIT's 60-day investigation

At first, the Sharif family members had refused to appear before the investigators. However, as the court exercised its power to issue arrest warrants for no-shows, the former premier started arriving at the court hearings — though sporadically.

Maryam and her husband Capt Safdar eventually appeared before the courts but Hassan and Hussain Nawaz were declared proclaimed offenders for their repeated absence.

"My brothers live abroad [...] the laws of here [Pakistan] don't apply to them," Maryam had justified after a court hearing.

Explore: The Supreme Court still has some pretty damning things to say regarding Panamagate

Slowly but surely, the court indicted the ousted prime minister in the cases against him, including one pertaining to the Avenfield flats in London in which Maryam and Safdar were also named. All three pleaded 'not guilty' to the charges.

Read more: 'This isn't about accountability, it's about revenge,' Maryam on NAB references

On October 31, Nawaz was indicted in the Flagship Investment reference.

On November 15, the trial against the former premier, Maryam and Safdar formally began as NAB presented two witnesses before court.

On more than one occasion, Maryam as well as Nawaz flat out rejected the notion that the graft references against their family had anything to do with accountability.

"It has turned into revenge now," declared Maryam while speaking to the media after one of the hearings.

The noose tightens: Court questions Dar on owning 'assets beyond income'

In addition to the three references against the Sharif family members, NAB filed one against the then finance minister Ishaq Dar for owning assets beyond his known sources of income.

On Sept 27, as the accountability court indicted Dar, the accused pleaded not guilty to the charges. A few days later, Dar failed to appear before the court, and his counsel informed the bench that he had gone to London for medical treatment. The lawyer sought exemption from physical appearance before the court for his client. However, the request was denied and bailable warrants were issued.

On November 14, non-bailable arrest warrants were issued for Dar and, as he repeatedly failed to appear before the court, the accused was declared an absconder on December 11.

The finance ministry was in complete disorder as Dar remained abroad. Finally, on November 22, the government withdrew the portfolio of finance minister from Dar following his application for 'leave'.

Dar is currently in London.

The reluctant apology: ECP repeatedly calls Imran Khan over contempt notice

Several petitions were filed against Khan in the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) in 2017 — one such petition, that garnered the public's interest, was filed on January 23 by former PTI member Akbar S. Babar, saying Khan had made contemptuous remarks about the election body.

Khan had accused the ECP of being biased against the PTI in a separate case, which was also filed by Babar in 2014. A formal contempt notice had been issued to Khan over his “defaming and scandalising” the ECP.

A week before the petition was filed, Khan's counsel had tendered an unconditional apology to the ECP. At the time, the PTI chief had said that his counsel had tendered apology in his personal capacity. However, months later, on September 25, Khan owned the apology.

The PTI chief had yet to appear before the ECP in keeping with a number of summons the commission had issued for him when, on October 12, the commission issued non-bailable arrest warrants for Khan on contempt charges.

On October 26, Khan, flanked by other leaders of the PTI, appeared before the ECP and was asked to submit a written apology.

Read more: Footprints: A long-drawn apology

The PTI chief and his lawyer penned an apology and submitted it to the commission.

However, the commission, once again, expressed its disapproval over the apology and Khan was made to write a second apology.

Later that day, the charges against him were dropped.

Evidence for all to see: Court asks Punjab govt to make Model Town report public

On December 5, the Punjab government found itself in a tight spot as it was ordered by the Lahore High Court to make public Justice Baqar Najafi's report on the violent Model Town incident of 2014, in which 14 supporters of Pakistan Awami Tehreek (PAT) leader Tahirul Qadri were killed.

The damning report was released later that day and Justice Najafi's conclusions made clear why the Punjab government had fought tooth and nail to prevent its release.

Editorial: Justice Najafi’s report

The judge found that it was the determination of the then Punjab minister for parliamentary affairs Rana Sanaullah to prevent Qadri from holding a long march from Lahore to Islamabad that influenced the police's heavy-handed strategy in dealing with the protesters.

The report said that the "facts and circumstances of the bloodbath show that the police officers actively participated in the massacre." It stated that provincial authorities had proceeded with "apathy and recklessness" against Qadri's supporters.

It was a victory for Qadri and his efforts to seek justice for his supporters.

In the days following the report's release, he called for Punjab Chief Minister Shahbaz Sharif and Rana Sanuallah resignations. He also demanded the removal of suspected bureaucrats and police officials from active duty in addition to the formation of a joint investigation team to probe the incident.

PPP, PTI and the Awami National Party have all voiced support for Qadri.

Sharif and Sanaullah have been warned by Qadri to resign by Dec 31 or face a protest movement for their ouster.

Indian spy in Pakistan: Military tribunal sentences Jadhav to death

On April 10, the sensational story of the Indian spy that began in March 2016 and witnessed several twists, climaxed when a Field General Court Martial in Pakistan sentenced Kulbashan Jadhav to death over charges of espionage and terrorism.

The death sentence was announced after a trial was conducted by the military tribunal. The lack of transparency in Jadhav's trial in Pakistan, however, raised questions across the border.

Explore: Transcript of RAW agent Kulbhushan’s confessional statement

In Pakistan, Jadhav's confession of carrying out terrorist acts in the country and the sentence against him were seen as proof of Indian interference in domestic affairs. In India, it was seen as an act of premeditated murder and roughly a month after the sentence was announced, India moved the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against Pakistan, accusing the latter of violating the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations.

India maintained that Pakistan, despite repeated requests, had denied consular access to Jadhav and sought to restrain Pakistan from carrying out the death sentence against him.

Read more: Who is Kulbushan Jadhav?

At the ICJ, Pakistan challenged the jurisdiction of the court to hear the case. The argument was rejected and the execution was stayed.

The case is currently being heard at the ICJ.

The state of Katas Raj: 'Why are there no idols in the Hindu temple?' asks SC

On Dec 2, pilgrims from various states in India arrived in Pakistan to visit Katas Raj ─ an ancient complex of temples surrounded by a pond, which Hindus believe was formed by the falling tears of their deity Shiva. However, they were disappointed upon their arrival to see that the pond had almost dried up and there was not enough water to perform Ashnan, a bath which is a crucial part of the pilgrimage.

Earlier, in November, media reports of the pond's condition had prompted Chief Justice Mian Saqib Nisar to take suo motu notice of the matter. Reports had suggested that the pond was drying out due to water consumption by nearby cement factories. In one hearing of the case, the Punjab government confirmed the reports and the chief justice regretted its inability to safeguard one of the Hindu community's most well-known places of worship.

The SC, during the hearings, championed the rights of the religious minority, expressing dismay over the absence of idols in the Sri Ram and Hanuman temples in the Katas Raj complex.

"This temple is not just a place of cultural significance for the Hindu community, but also a part of our national heritage," the chief justice had observed.

On Dec 13, the SC ordered Bestway Cement, one of the four major cement production units located in the area, to fill up the pond within a week.