Law: Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003

Section: 3,5

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 204,270-AA,184(3)

Law: Contempt of Court Act, 1976

Section: Preamble,10

Contempt of Court Ordinance (V of 2003)-------Preamble, Ss.3 & 5---Contempt of Court Act (LXIV of 1976)---Preamble---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts.204, 270-AA & 184(3)---Contempt proceedings---Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 has been given permanence and protection by Art.270-AA of the Constitution; and S.20 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 has repealed the Contempt of Court Act, 1976---Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 is the law in force regulating proceedings of contempt of court---Contention, in the present case, was that since notices to the petitioners and the respondents in the connected matters were issued under Contempt of Court Act, 1976 in accordance with the order of a 14 Members Bench of the Supreme Court, a 5 Member Bench (present Bench) could not alter the provision of law---Held, indeed the notices were issued "under Art.204 of the Constitution read with Ss.3 & 4 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1976 or any other enabling provisions of the relevant law "; reference to "any other enabling provision of the relevant law ", in the notices, was in the alternative to the provisions of the Contempt of Court Act, 1976 and said phrase was added as a precaution---Contention that said phrase be read as ejusdem generis with the Contempt of Court Act, 1976 was untenable in that the "enabling provisions" mentioned in the phrase was followed by the words "of the relevant law" which meant law other than the Contempt of Court Act, 1976, if so found relevant---Supreme Court observed that it was, therefore, not necessary to refer the case back to a larger Bench for rectifying the order of issuing notices---In view of the finding that Contempt of Court Act, 1976 stood repealed, contention that constitutional petitions be heard as intro court appeals under S.10(2 A), Contempt of Court Act, 1976 was repelled being not maintainable---Supreme Court while clarifying and specifying the law under which the proceedings, in the present case, would be regulated, further observed that respondents, therein, may if so advised, file additional statements and the case shall come up for preliminary hearing under S.17(3) of the Contempt of Court…

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