Law: Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2004

Section: 3, 17

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 10-A

Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2004 (I of 2004)-- ----Ss. 3 & 17--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 10-A--Contempt by advocate--Indecent/scandalous language in Court--Wilful non-appearance--Ex-parte proceedings--Waiver of right of defence/cross-examination--Obstruction of justice--Summary procedure--Conviction in absentia--Dignity and authority of Court--Punishment--The law could not be interpreted to allow a contemnor to paralyze court’s hand by simply refusing to appear--This interpretation was fortified by established jurisprudence of superior courts--In G. S. Gideon v. The State (PLD 1963 SC 1), Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan clarified that while contemnor should be given fullest opportunity of defending himself, such opportunity was deemed satisfied even if hearing proceeded ex-parte when contemnor deliberately avoided process--Furthermore, while court remained cautious of convictions in absentia, present case was distinguished by Accused’s ‘clear, deliberate pattern of non-compliance’--Unlike cases where notice might have been in doubt, accused here was present for framing of charge and subsequently ‘completely disappeared,’ leaving Court no choice but to protect majesty of law by proceeding to judgment--Consequently, unrefuted evidence of Complainant and court officials stood as conclusive proof of accused’s guilt. [Pp. 97, 99] A & B Mr. Niaz Muhammad, AAG for State. Nemo for Accd/Respondent-Contemnor. Date of hearing: 23.2.2026. Judgment A complaint Bearing No. 39/CJ-II/1-Q, Swat dated 14.5.2025 was submitted by Ms. Fozia Nasim Civil Judge-II/Illaqa Qazi, Swat to the Registrar of this Court against Asadullah, advocate/member District Bar Association, Swat complaining about the use of indecent, scandalous, filthy, contemptuous, obnoxious language while addressing the Court. The complaint was placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice and his lordship was pleased to convert the same into Contempt of court petition. The petition was placed before a Division Bench of this Court which vide order dated 15.5.2025, issued notice to the advocate to file his reply within seven days and his license was…