In re : CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST MR. MUHAMMAD AYUB KHAN vs NOT
This matter involves contempt proceedings initiated against the respondent, Muhammad Ayub Khan, for supplying a fabricated and forged photocopy of a Supreme Court order to a military officer to deceive him regarding efforts to secure land allotments. The core legal question was whether the respondent was responsible for forging and circulating the fake court order or if it was provided by a third party as claimed. The Supreme Court held that the respondent failed to substantiate his defense that a third party named Fazal Elahi supplied the document, concluding that the respondent himself fabricated and circulated the forged order for wrongful gain. The Court established the principle that circulating forged court documents and failing to substantiate false claims of third-party involvement constitutes a gross abuse of the process of the court and contempt, punishable by imprisonment and fine.
- Whether circulating a fabricated photocopy of a court order constitutes contempt of court?
- Can a contemner escape liability for a forged court order by falsely blaming an untraceable third party?
ORDER
1. ' NAS1M HASAN SHAH, J.-In the third week of November, 1982, it was brought to notice of this Court that the respondent Muhammad Ayub Khan supplied a photo-copy of an order to Major Muhammad Amin GSO-H, N.C.C., Government Degree College, Jaranwala, District Faisalabad, purported to have been made by this Court in Civil Petition No, 664 of 1982 in order to make him believe that he (Muhammad Ayub Khan) was making efforts to get him some land allotted in District Bbakkar.
2. ' On a scrutiny being made in the Registry of this Court it was found that the aforesaid photo-copy of the order was a fabricated document and a complete forgery. Consequently, the Registrar of this Court was directed to make an inquiry into the matter and submit his report.
3. ' The respondent, Muhammad Ayub Khan, appeared before the Registrar, in connection with the enquiry which he was directed to make and before him he admitted that the photo-copy in question was given to Major Muhammad Amin by him but he further alleged that the said photo- copy was supplied to him by one Fazal Elahi, resident of District Bhakkar.
4. ' Accordingly, summons were issued to Fazal Elahi on the address supplied by the respondent but the person, who appeared in response to the summons was not the person named by the respondent. The respondents thereafter sought time to produce the correct Fazal Elahi who allegedly had supplied the photo-copy of the order of this Court to him, but he was not able to do so. It, therefore, appeared that the name of Fazal Elahi as the person who had supplied the photo- copy to him was falsely given by him whereas, in reality, it was he himself who was responsible for forging the order of the Court, presumably for wrongful gain. He was, therefore, issued a notice to show cause why he should not be punished for committing contempt of this Court.
5. ' The respondent has appeared before us, alongwith Mr. Bashir Ahmad Ansari, Advocate, today and his learned counsel has reiterated the stand that was taken by the respondent before the Registrar, namely, that the forged and fabricated photo-copy of this Court's order was, in fact, supplied to him by Fazal Elahi and that he had innocently passed it one to Major Muhammad Amin. It was further submitted that Fazal Elahi had, in the meantime left Pakistan and gone to Saudi Arabia and was living in Jedda and that efforts had been made to contact him both by the respondent himself, as also through Pakistan Embassy at Jedda but without success. According to the submission of the learned counsel, the respondent is merely an innocent victim of the wrong doing cf Fazal Elahi, aforesaid.
6. ' There is no dispute that the photo-copy of the forged and fabricated document of this Court was supplied by the respondent to Major Muhammad Amin. He has tried to absolve himself of the blame by pleading that it was somebody else, namely, Fazal Elahi who had given the said copy to him. However, he has failed to establish this fact and we cannot, therefore, accept the story that the photo-copy of the forged and fabricated document of this Court's order was prepared by him, which was later on handed over to Major Muhammad Amin, presumably for a purpose of obtaining some wrongful gain.
7. ' We are, therefore, of the opinion that the contemner has grossly abused the process of the Court by forging and fabricating the order of this Court and has scandalised it.
8. ' We, accordingly, convict him for having committed contempt of this Court and sentence him to three months' simple imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs, 5,000. In lieu of payment of fine he shall suffer further simple imprisonment for one month.