Pakistan Case Law
1986 SCMR 1015

NAIMAT ALI vs Mirza ABDUL RASHID BAIG And Other

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1986 SCMR 1015
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Original No. 4-R of 1986 Civil Review Petition No. 64 of 1980
Date1986-02-28
Judge(s)Muhammad Haleem, C.J., Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Nasim Hasan Shah, Shafiur Rahman and Zaffar Hussain Mirza
Authored byMuhammad Haleem
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from contempt proceedings before the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The core legal question concerned the acceptance of apologies tendered by the respondents and their counsel for actions relating to a civil suit and judicial proceedings. The court held that unconditional apologies tendered by the private respondents, along with the withdrawal of the underlying civil suit from the court of the Civil Judge, Lahore, and the contrition shown by counsel, constituted sufficient amends to resolve the matter. Consequently, the court decided to consign the matter to the record regarding both the respondents and the Civil Judge, concluding that no further proceedings were necessary. The key principle laid down is that unconditional apologies and remedial actions, such as the withdrawal of contested proceedings, may be accepted as sufficient amends to close contempt or related proceedings.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Are unconditional apologies and withdrawal of the underlying suit sufficient amends to consign contempt proceedings to the record?
  • Whether further proceedings are necessary against a judicial officer when apologies have been accepted and the matter resolved?
contempt of courtunconditional apologywithdrawal of suitsufficient amendsSupreme Court of Pakistan

ORDER

1. MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.--Mirza Abdul Rashid on his behalf and on behalf of the other private respondents has tendered an unconditional apology and has further stated that he had withdrawn the suit from the Court of the Civil Budge, Lahore, on 22-2-1986.

2. The counsel for the respondent has also shown contrition and has tendered an unqualified apology. These apologies, in our view, are sufficient amends, and, accordingly, we would consign the matter to record. As for the Civil Judge, we do not think that any further proceedings are necessary against him and we consign the matter to record in his case as well.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.