Find a Lawyer

GHULAM SHAKEEL versus S.H.O., NAULAKHA

Article 3 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 204 of the contempt of court Act 1976, the petitioner station house officer of the contempt court was summoned by the High Court in a writ petition, from which it was remarked that the remarks were to be obtained from the High Court. Instead of seeking an unconditional and unforgivable apology to the court, the law administration's disrespectful, derogatory, and contemptuous court reaffirmed the position that the remarks attributed to them were false, nor did they seriously express any regrets and Neither apologized nor wished to file an apology in writing. To withdraw the objectionable words, however, Kontaminer requested an apology only after the conclusion of the trial, when the decision was reserved for judgment, while Kintynemer committed the first offense of contempt of court, the High Court observing. He was sentenced to court and fined Rs 100 immigration advocates email from Pir Mahal lawyer