CH. MUHAMMAD ASHRAF GUJJAR versus MALIK RIAZ HUSSAIN
Article 204 Ordinance of contempt of court (V of 2003), Sections 17 and 3 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980, OXXVII, R7 (2) The contempt of court proceedings alleged by the Attorney General Atlas General in the Attorney General's will The impact of the claim The list of witnesses presented by the Attorney General, excluding the names of the most important witnesses who can prove the evidence contained in a compact disc (CD), will give rise to the fear that he will be treated as fair, honest. , Was not ready to prosecute. And in the current law, according to the Attorney General, when it comes to questions such as where the evidence contained a compact disc (CD) came from. Who produced it and how would this be proven without the names of the witnesses, who could produce evidence on their behalf, their reply was that they expected the contents of the said compact disc (CD) to be reported? Will be accepted by the respondents. How can the Attorney General present such a motion at this stage, and thus, it may lay the basis for excluding the names of the most important witnesses, even though a prosecutor who claimed to work independently or supported the prosecution? I did not produce the evidence, but it should at least bring the evidence that was available and necessary for the evidence to be charged. In the list of witnesses presented by the Attorney General, the name of the Chief Justice was the question of the Supreme Court. How can the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court explain his position? The witness in the above list when he did not file a complaint or affidavit in his personal capacity even if that were the case, section 17 of the Chief Justice contempt of court Ordinance 2003
