Case Details

Citation(s)
2015 SLG 180 2015 SLD 180 2015 SCMR 658
Supreme Court of Pakistan
(Reference by the President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan under Article 186 of the Constitution to revisit the case of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto reported as PLD 1979 SC 38 and 53) Reference No.1 of 2011, decision dated: 17-01-2012
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, C.J., MIAN SHAKIRULLAH, JAN, TASSADUQ HUSSAIN, JILLANI, NASIR-UL-MULK, JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, ANWAR ZAHEER, JAMALI, KHILJI ARIF HUSSAIN, TARIQ PARVEZ, MIAN SAQIB NISAR, SARMAD, JALAL OSMANY AND AMIR HANI MUSLIM, JJ
Dr. Babar Awan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of President. Moulvi Anwarul Haq, Attorney-General for Pakistan and Dil Muhammad Khan Alizai, DAG, Amanullah Kanrani, AG, Balochistan, Asadullah Chamkani, AG, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Jawad Hassan, Additi

REFERENCE NO.1 OF 2011: In the matter of

Law: Supreme Court Rules, 1980

Section: O.IV,R.30

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 186,204

Law: Contempt of Court Act, 1976

Section: 3

Supreme Court Rules, 1980--- ----O. IV, R. 30---Contempt of Court Act (LXIV of 1976), S. 3---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 186 & 204---Reference to the Supreme Court under Art. 186 of the Constitution by the President of Pakistan to revisit the case of death sentence awarded to late Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, former Prime Minister of Pakistan reported as PLD 1979 SC 38 & 53---Contempt of court---Attempt to ridicule the Supreme Court by counsel appearing for the President---Conduct unbecoming of an Advocate of the Supreme Court---Disciplinary action---Temporary suspension of licence to appear before the Supreme Court---Advocate Supreme Court who was appearing on behalf of the President in the Reference was issued with a contempt of court notice in respect of a press conference addressed by him---Said Advocate, after receipt of such notice, addressed the electronic media and through his utterance and gestures attempted to ridicule the Supreme Court---Attitude shown by Advocate in question after receipt of contempt notice, compelled the Supreme Court to issue him a notice in terms of O. IV, R.30 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980 to explain as to why his name should not be removed from the Roll of the Advocates of the Supreme Court---Contention of Advocate in question was that he may be allowed time to engage a counsel---Validity---More than sufficient time was granted to the Advocate in question and as the present Bench was seized with one of the most important cases, i.e., the Reference sent by the President of Pakistan under Art. 186 of the Constitution concerning the death sentence awarded to late Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, former Prime Minister of Pakistan, therefore, the Supreme Court had to proceed with the said case, as early as possible, without causing delay in any manner---Unless the question of notice, which had been issued to the Advocate in question under O. IV, R. 30 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980, was decided, it would not be appropriate to proceed with the said Reference---Supreme Court granted Advocate in question time to engage a counsel and file his reply, but at the same time to ensure dignity and respect of the Court, his licence to appear…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492