Case Details

Citation(s)
1962 SLG 489 1962 SLD 489 1962 PLD 457
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 1962, decided on 30th May 1962.
S. A. RAHMAN, FAZLE-AKBAR, B. Z. KAIKAUS AND HAMOODUR RAHMAN, JJ
Ala Ullah Sajjad Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Saeed Akhtar Attorney for Appellants. Mushtaq Hussain Additional Advocate General West Pakistan (Said Akbar Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Ijaz Ali Attorney for
Respondent No. 1. Ahma

SAADAT KHIALY, STAFF REPORTER ("KOHISTAN" DAILY) AND others--Appellants

VS

(1) THE STATE AND (2) SHAMA OVERSEAS (PRIVATE) LTD.

Law:

Section:

(a) Contempt of Court------Newspaper comment on pending litigation-Comment to be read as a whole-Article read reasonably should be "calculated or should have tendency to prejudice mankind against party to litigation Prejudice "in fact", or "intention" to k prejudice, not necessary-Fair comment, what is-Courts not to be "unduly touchy" Publication of "briefs, pleadings or petitions, even without comment", not always protected-"Technical con ­tempts" not to be taken notice of. The proceeding for contempt was initiated on the basis of a petition filed by respondent No. 2 under section 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1926, in respect of an article published in a daily newspaper, called "The Kohistan", on the 9th of October 1958, under the caption: The said respondent, which was a private limited company carrying on inter alia, the business of cross-word puzzles popularly known as Shama Moimmas, complained through its Manager that the publication in question was a deliberate mis-reporting of a criminal case under section 107/151 of the Criminal Procedure Code started by the said Manager against one M in the Court of a Magistrate, which was still pending on the date the publication appeared in the newspaper ; that it constituted an attempt on the part of the appellants to interrupt the course of justice by dis­turbing the calm atmosphere essential for judicial determination of disputes by a Court of law, and that it had been made maliciously in order to wreak vengeance upon the said respondent for discontinuing the publication of its advertisements in the said newspaper Held, that after perusing the offending article as a whole, and reading it even liberally, it was 'not possible to agree that the article was confined merely to making fair comments on a question of public importance. If the article read reasonably and as a whole was calculated or had the tendency to prejudice mankind against one or other of the parties involved in the proceedings, it was enough to amount to an interference with the course of justice, for, the question in these cases is not as to whether the publication has, in fact, interfered or not or as to what was the intention of the author…
🔒
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