AGL 38.18 Decreased By ▼ -0.22 (-0.57%)
AIRLINK 142.98 Increased By ▲ 7.98 (5.91%)
BOP 5.07 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.39%)
CNERGY 3.77 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.53%)
DCL 7.56 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.4%)
DFML 44.48 Increased By ▲ 0.03 (0.07%)
DGKC 76.25 Decreased By ▼ -1.15 (-1.49%)
FCCL 26.95 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.26%)
FFBL 52.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.97 (-1.83%)
FFL 8.52 Decreased By ▼ -0.02 (-0.23%)
HUBC 125.51 Increased By ▲ 1.71 (1.38%)
HUMNL 9.99 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.5%)
KEL 3.74 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.27%)
KOSM 8.15 Increased By ▲ 0.07 (0.87%)
MLCF 34.75 Increased By ▲ 1.05 (3.12%)
NBP 58.71 Increased By ▲ 0.22 (0.38%)
OGDC 154.50 Increased By ▲ 4.55 (3.03%)
PAEL 25.15 Increased By ▲ 0.45 (1.82%)
PIBTL 5.93 Increased By ▲ 0.08 (1.37%)
PPL 118.31 Increased By ▲ 6.66 (5.97%)
PRL 24.38 Increased By ▲ 0.48 (2.01%)
PTC 12.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.83%)
SEARL 56.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.89 (-1.56%)
TELE 7.05 Increased By ▲ 0.05 (0.71%)
TOMCL 34.99 Decreased By ▼ -0.16 (-0.46%)
TPLP 6.98 Decreased By ▼ -0.07 (-0.99%)
TREET 13.98 Decreased By ▼ -0.18 (-1.27%)
TRG 46.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.13 (-0.28%)
UNITY 26.00 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-0.31%)
WTL 1.21 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
BR100 8,822 Increased By 86.7 (0.99%)
BR30 26,723 Increased By 466.7 (1.78%)
KSE100 83,532 Increased By 810.2 (0.98%)
KSE30 26,710 Increased By 328 (1.24%)

A counsel of one of the PCO judges on Thursday argued before Supreme Court that judges and army generals did not fall in the category of civil society, hence contempt of court proceeding could not be initiated against them.
Advocate Raza Kazim, counsel for Justice Syed Hamid Ali Shah, argued that judges and (army) generals were not considered as civil society members, so contempt of court proceeding could not be initiated against them (judges, generals) unless there was a solid evidence.
A five-member bench comprising Justice Muhammad Sair Ali, Justice Mahmood Akhtar Shahid Siddiquie, Justice Jawaad S. Khawaja, Justice Khilji Arif Hussain and Justice Tariq Parvez was hearing contempt of court case against PCO judges, who had violated the 14-member bench decision on November 3, 20007 by taking oath under PCO.
Dr Abdul Basit, counsel for a PCO judge, objected to formation of the bench, hearing contempt of court cases against the PCO judges, saying that three judges of the bench had an ugly incident with his client, therefore, he wants they should not hear the case.
Dr Khalid Ranjha said that when his client was elevated to the court, the SC had passed many judgements. Defacto Court was considered De jure Court. The judgement of November 3 was law and the judgement of November 6 and 19 were also law, saying that there was a need to accept the judgements of subsequent courts, he contended.
"This case is not against two persons, court or citizens but between the judges, so the apex court must show some restraint in the case," he pleaded. In its July 31, 2009 verdict, the apex court had directed the government to file references in the Supreme Judicial Council against those judges, who had taken oath under PCO on November 3, 2007 and violated the 14-members larger bench judgement against PCO.
However, law ministry did not file any reference against PCO judges in Supreme Judicial Council. The court later issued contempt of court notices to those judges, who had violated November 3, 2007 decision against PCO. Over 60 judges of the superior courts tendered their apologies before the apex court. However 10 judges had not apologised and decided to contest the contempt of court cases, including former Justice Iftikhar Hussain Chaudhry, Justice Khurshid Bhinder, Justice Hamid Ali Shah, Justice Zafar Iqbal Chaudhry, Justice Hasnat Ahmad Khan, Justice Shabbar Raza Rizvi, Justice Yasmin Abbasi, Justice Jahan Zaib Rahim, Justice Sayed Zahid Hussain and Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar. Further hearing of the case was adjourned till today (Wednesday).

Copyright Business Recorder, 2010

Comments

Comments are closed.