Case Details

Citation(s)
1975 SLG 388 1975 SLD 388 1975 PLD 484
Supreme Court of Pakistan

HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J., SALAHUDDIN AHMED AND MUHAMMAD AFZAL CHEEMA, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

MUJIB-UR-RAHMAN SHAMI AND another

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1972)-Art. 206(2)-Contempt of superior Courts-Apology tendered after conviction-Appellant contemners admitting impugned publication to be mischievously incorrect arid to have been supplied by persons actuated by motives of personal malice aimed at seeking personal vengeance against maligned Judge, publicly expressing regret in news­papers and also in petitions addressed to maligned Judge, and requesting him to accept tauba (confession of past mistakes and firm resolve to avoid same in future)-Maligned Judge and Full Bench of High Court accepting apology-Supreme Court, being satisfied as to genuineness and sincerity of expression of appellants' remorse and their offering to assist High Court in bringing real culprits to book, sentence reduced to period already suffered. Constitution of Pakistan (1972)- --Art, 206(2)-Contempt of superior Courts-Apology, acceptance of, by Appellate Court-Proceedings for contempt of Court-Sui generis in nature-Analogy of appeal being continuation of same cause and appellate Court having all powers of original Court-Not apt to contempt cases-Apology tendered at stage of appeal before Supreme Court-Cannot be accepted by Supreme Court in respect of contempt of another Court-Supreme Court can, however, reduce sentence. The Supreme Court felt unable to accept that in the case of a contempt of another Court, it can accept the apology tendered at the stage of the appeal, and proceeded to observe that a contempt of Court proceeding, is a matter sui generis in nature. The anology of an appeal is not, therefore, apt: There is neither precedent nor principle to support it. It is difficult to appreciate how, when one Court has been scandalized, another superior Court can say that it will pardon it. This would be defeating the very object of a proceeding for committal for contempt. Fakhar-e-Alam v. State P L D 1973 S C 525 distinguished. Sir Edward Snelson v. Judges of the High Court of West Pakistan P L D 1961 S C 237 ; Yousuf Ali Khan v. The State P L D 1970 S C 350 ; Saadat Khialy v. The State P L D 1962 S C 457 and Muhammad Waris v. The State 1975 S C M R 106 ref. (c) Constitution of Pakistan (1972)- --Art.…
🔒
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