Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 15‑R of 1979, heard on 26th Match 1979.

-----Art. 204‑Contempt of Court‑Petitioner seeking action for contempt against respondents firstly on ground of respondents having conspired to arrange firing at residence of some Judges, and secondly on ground of one of respondents having been making certain state ments in newspapers wl4ich tended to obstruct course of justice during pendency of appeal relaising to' a specified murder case‑No copies of statements attached with petition nor any details given as to when and where such statements made or 'published‑Petition, held, a motivated petition, not intended really for upholding dignity of judiciary but for some other purpose and consequently dismissed.

-----Art. 204‑Contempt of Court‑During pendency of his earlier petition seeking action for contempt of Court against respondents, petitioner filing a miscellaneous application praying for hearing of con tempt matter before decision of review petition filed by ex‑Prime Minister‑No explanation given as to how such a prayer could be made in connection with a contempt matter‑Petition dismissed.

Petitioner in person.

Date of hearing 26th March, 1979.

.‑This is an entirely misconceived petition seeking action for contempt against the respondents, firstly on the ground, that they had conspired to arrange firing at the residence of some High Court Judges, sometime ago and secondly on the ground that respondent No. 2 had been making certain statements in newspapers which had the tendency to a obstruct the course of justice during the pendency of appeal relating to murder of Nawab Muhammad Ahmad Khan. No copies of the statements are attached with the petition, nor any details given as to when and where they statements were made or published.

During the pendency of this petition the petitioner had sent a miscellaneous application to the Supreme Court praying that this contempt matter should be heard before the decision of the review petition filed by appellant Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in that case in the Supreme Court. The petitioner has not been able to explain as to how such a prayer can be made in connection with a contempt matter.

After hearing the petitioner, who is a practising Advocate of the High Court, we are left with the impression that this was a motivated petition, nor intended really for upholding the dignity of the Judiciary, but for some other purpose, which became apparent from the contents of the miscellaneous application filed by him. In the circumstances, the petition as well as the miscellaneous application are dismissed.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.