Ch. MUHAMMAD ARSHAD vs LT. GEN. FAIZ ALI CHISHTI ETC.S
This matter arises from a contempt petition filed by a practising advocate against the respondents alleging a conspiracy to arrange firing at the residence of High Court Judges and the making of statements in newspapers obstructing the course of justice during the pendency of a murder appeal. The Supreme Court examined the petition and a subsequent miscellaneous application requesting the contempt matter to be heard before the decision of a pending review petition. The Court observed that no copies or details of the alleged statements were provided and that the petitioner failed to explain the nexus between the contempt matter and the review petition. Holding that the petition was motivated and not genuinely intended to uphold the dignity of the judiciary, the Supreme Court dismissed both the contempt petition and the miscellaneous application.
- Can a contempt petition be entertained without furnishing copies or details of the alleged statements claimed to obstruct the course of justice?
- Whether a contempt petition aimed at purposes other than upholding the dignity of the judiciary can be dismissed as motivated?
ORDER
1. ANWARUL HAQ, C. J.-This is anentirely misconceived petition seeking action for contempt against the respondents, firstly on the ground, that they had conspired to arrange firing at the residence of some High Court Judges, sometime ago and secondly on the ground that respondent No. 2 had been making certain statements in newspapers which had the tendency to a obstruct the course of justice during the pendency of appeal relating to murder of Nawab Muhammad Ahmad Khan.
2. No copies of the statements are attached with the petition, nor any details given as to when and where they statements were made or published.
3. During the pendency of this petition the petitioner had sent a miscellaneous application to the Supreme Court praying that this contempt matter should be heard before the decision of the review petition filed by appellant Zulfikar A.I Bhutto in that case in the Supreme Court. The petitioner has not been able to explain as to how such a prayer can be made in connection with a contempt matter.
4. After hearing the petitioner, who is a practising Advocate of the High Court, we are left with the impression that this was a motivated petition, nor intended really for upholding the dignity of the Judiciary, but for some other purpose, which became apparent from the contents of the miscellaneous application filed by him. In the circumstances, the petition as well as the miscellaneous application are dismissed.