SC bench disposes of additional registrar’s intra-court contempt appeal

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court disposed of the intra-court appeal against Additional Registrar Nazar Abbas after the appeal petition was withdrawn by the plaintiff.

Justice Athar Minallah and Justice Shahid Waheed disposed of the case without giving any reasons. The majority of the bench will give reasons for disposing of the intra-court appeal, the court said, adding that Justice Jamal Mandokhail, Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, Justice Musarrat Hilali and Justice Irfan Saadat will give reasons.

Additional Registrar contempt of court case: SC announces reserved verdict

Initially, Justice Mandokhail said to petitioner that he could withdraw the claim but the petition is now before the bench.

Justice Athar Minallah asked the petitioner why he wished to withdraw his appeal. The counsel of the Additional Registrar responded that the contempt of court notice was withdrawn and therefore the appeal is not needed anymore. The lawyer also read out the verdict of Justice Mansoor Ali Shah that came earlier today.

Justice Athar, addressing the lawyer said, “Has the order to end the contempt of court proceedings come?,” adding that in the verdict, even the Chief Justice was included among those who allegedly committed contempt of court.

Justice Mandokhail added, “Will those who allegedly committed contempt form a full court? The main case is scheduled for hearing before the constitutional bench.”

Justice Mazhar added, “The entire procedure has been described in the contempt of court law. The committees were held as accused of contempt,” adding that the procedure dictates that first the notice is given.

The court said that the whole world has the right to a fair trial under Article 10A. “Is Article 10A not available for judges?” Justice Mazhar said, adding the question that will the full court that will be formed include the four judges who allegedly committed contempt?

“If we had given notice, the four judges would have appeared in their court,” Justice Mazhar added.

Justice Shahid Waheed asked, “Can we look into a matter that was not [even] brought up in the intra-court appeal?”

Justice Mazhar added, “So should we also file an intra-court appeal against the decision?”

“Can this case be sent to the Constitutional Bench to determine jurisdiction?” the larger bench asked, to which the Additional Attorney General Aamir Rehman responded that the intra-court appeal cannot go to the Constitutional Bench.

Justice Athar Minallah said, “The appeal that was before us has become ineffective. If there is no case before the court, then who is the action being taken against?”

“Whatever is happening is the misfortune of this institution of the judiciary,” he said, adding that if the Supreme Court had stood by the letter of six judges, this situation would not have happened today.

“Whether it’s politicians or the public, [no one] learns anything from past mistakes,” Justice Athar Minallah added.

Justice Mandokhail asked Additional Attorney General Aamir Rehman on his position on the matter.

SC bench hears arguments against 26th constitutional amendment

The court posed the query that with the current case, there is a problem that this decision was not challenged before this bench. The court can review the decision only when it is challenged. “If the decision is to be taken suo moto, then the authority for it lies with the Constitutional Bench,” Justice Shahid Waheed added.

After hearing comments of the petitioner’s lawyer and the advice of the Additional Attorney General, the court disposed of the case.