ABDUL QUDDUS MUGHAL versus MANZOOR AHMED WATTOO, MINISTER FOR INDUSTRIES AND PRODUCTION, ISLAMABAD
Article 204 contempt of court Ordinance (IV of 2003), Section 3/4 The High Court passed a decision to maintain the former sugar and retail price of sugar at Rs 36 per kg and Rs 40 per kg respectively. Was. The above order refused to speak derogatoryly and to approve the remarks that the High Court could enforce the order itself and that they were unwilling to do so in such humiliating comments as the Electronic. As well as the print media, there were flashes. The controversial statement was that the High Court should implement the decision on its own, and the Federal Government did not have any Tehsildars and Detectives to impose the same responsible Minister for Industry and Production, Government of Pakistan, who within minutes. In relying on these words I refused. The meeting of the Standing Committee, issued by the National Assembly Secretariat, in which the statement was made, defendant's statement revealed that it contained no derogatory words, but he did so with public interest and moderate confidence in the general functioning of the court. I have formulated a strategy to put the High Court verdict through the government's fair comment and put into practice the issues facing them. Language and fair comments on the merits of the court's decision, which without contempt of the judge's integrity or impartiality, are in contempt of the commission of the court's jurisdiction over the merits of a court decision, Will not be synonymous. In contempt of court cases, it will be appealed if it turns out that there is a real prejudice that can be justified.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
