NASEER AHMED GHUMAN vs ABDUL JABBAR KHAN
Through this constitutional petition filed under Article 204 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner sought the initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent, alleging that the respondent made false and incorrect assertions while filing Intra Court Appeal No. 290 of 2006. The core legal question before the court was whether assailing an order or making assertions in judicial proceedings before a higher forum constitutes contempt of court. The Lahore High Court held that merely assailing an order or presenting assertions in an appeal does not amount to contempt of court. The court established the principle that approaching a higher forum or seeking a direction for a fair investigation in accordance with the law does not constitute contempt, and consequently dismissed the petition in limine as misconceived.
- Does making assertions in an appeal before a higher forum constitute contempt of court?
- Is seeking a direction for a fair investigation from a court considered contempt of court?
- Article 204, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973
ORDER
Through this petition filed under Article 204 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner has sought initiation of contempt proceedings against the respondent.
2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the contents of the petition it is straightaway noticed that this petition has been filed simply alleging that while filing- I.C.A. No,290 of 2006 by the respondent certain false and incorrect assertions were made before this Court. It is observed that assailing .Of some order before the higher forum is not contempt of the Court, Even otherwise during the hearing of the I.C.A. The only contention made by the learned counsel was that the application filed by the respondent herein for transfer of the investigation was not being disposed of by the police authorities and a direction was issued to decide the same in accordance with law while keeping in view the principle that to claim for the fair investigation was the right of every citizen. We do not find that the respondent made any contempt of this Court and this application is misconceived, which is dismissed in limine.