In re : CONTEMPT APPLICATION FILED BY MR. FATEH YAB ALI KHAN, ADVOCATE, KARACHI Misc. PETITION No, 1R/79 vs NOT
This matter arises from a contempt application filed by Mr. Fatehyab Ali Khan, Advocate, objecting to the appearance of the Attorney-General for Pakistan to assist the Court, and further alleging that the Attorney-General committed contempt of court under Article 204 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 by making an incorrect statement regarding the holding of future elections in a previous case. The core legal question is whether the Attorney-General's expression of opinion or statement regarding election timelines in a prior proceeding renders him liable for contempt of court or disentitles him from assisting the Court as a law officer. The Supreme Court held that the petition is entirely misconceived and devoid of merit, noting that the Attorney-General had appeared merely as an officer of the Court to state his opinion on the time required for accountability and elections. The key principle laid down is that statements of opinion given by the Attorney-General in his official capacity as an officer of the Court do not constitute contempt of court.
- Whether the Attorney-General can be held liable for contempt of court for statements made in a prior judicial proceeding?
- Does an expression of opinion by the Attorney-General regarding election timelines constitute contempt under Article 204 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973?
- Can a petitioner object to the appearance of the Attorney-General assisting the Court as a law officer?
- Article 204, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
1. ' ANWARUL HAQ, C. J.-The petitioner Fatehyab Ali Khan has taken objection to the order made by this Court earlier in his contempt application bearing No, 1-R of 1979, directing the learned Attorney- General for Pakistan to appear and assist the Court in the contempt matter. The ground urged by Mr. Fatehyab Ali Khan is that during the hearing of the previous case, namely, Begum Nusrat Bhutto
(1) the learned Attorney General had given incorrect information to the Court regarding the holding of future elections by the Chief Martial Law Administrator. Apart from objecting.. To Mr. Sharifuddin Pirzada's appearance as an officer of the Court, the petitioner has also laid information, in the some application, stating that the learned Attorney-General has made himself liable for action under Article 204 of the Constitution of Pakistan for committing contempt of this Court by virtue of the incorrect statement allegedly made by him in the earlier case referred to above.
2. The petition is entirely misconceived, as even in the earlier case the learned Attorney-General had appeared as an officer of the Court and had merely stated his opinion as to the time needed for completing the process of accountability and holding general elections thereafter. The petition being entirely devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed. {{FOOT NOTE}}(1) PLD 1977 SC 657{{FOOT NOTE}}