ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Wednesday indicted alleged contemnor Agha Iftikharud Din Mirza for threatening and maligning the judiciary.
"We have considered the replies [of contemnor] and [are] altogether not satisfied and find the case is such where charges need to be framed. Consequently the charges are framed," said the order.
A three-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Gulzar Ahmed, heard the suo moto case against Agha Iftikharud Din Mirza.
Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Khalid Jawed, who prepared the charge-sheet, gave a copy of it to the counsel of alleged contemnor, Sarkar Abbas. She sought time to present something in defence and file a reply to the charges. Iftikharud Din appeared before the bench and tendered an apology. "I regret whatever I have stated in the video," he told the court. He also said that he would be careful in future.
The chief justice did not accept his apology, and said that whatever he had stated in the video clip was not pardonable.
Justice Ijazul Ahsan told Iftikharud Din: "You are an educated man and have done BSc and have links with people in various countries, therefore, you should have been careful about using derogatory language against the Supreme Court".
The chief justice said they could not allow people to scandalize courts, adding if contemnors were not punished then how they would provide justice to the citizens.
The chief justice asked the AGP to file a reply to the affidavit of Sarina Isa regarding direct threats to Justice Qazi Faez Isa in the video, which was submitted in the apex court.
The apex court judge's wife raised 24 questions in the affidavit.
"Why was an FIR not registered by the Secretariat Police Station? Is every FIR in the country registered, as I was told, after taking instruction from the Minister of Interior?
"The FIA registered an FIR only after it learnt that the Supreme Court had taken notice. Why are terrorists being protected? YouTube channels reported that when the criminal came to the Supreme Court on 26th June he was relaxed. He had a cup of tea. He was provided protection and protocol. Is this how those who make death threats to a judge of the Supreme Court treated?
"His lawyer stated that her client was not allowed to come before the Court on 26th June. Why? Was this because they were afraid that he will tell the Court who the video was made for? The crime was reported on 24th June 2020, when I [Sarina Isa] had provided the man's picture, cell phone number and address. But he was arrested on 29th June. Why did it take six days to arrest him?
"Why, of the 17 judges of the Supreme Court and many more of the High Court, was my husband chosen? Is this a coincidence? Why did this man malign the Army and display the photograph of the Army Chief in his video?
"In my application to the police I had suspected that the death threat to my husband was in continuation of Abdul Waheed Dogar's complaint. Mirza Shahzad Akbar had said he had not met Abdul Waheed Dogar. Why then is Mirza Shahzad Akbar not questioned? Why is Abdul Waheed Dogar not questioned?
"Why did the FIA have to write in its report to the Supreme Court, the man had "denied that he had delivered the said speech on the direction or instigation of some else"? Isn't the FIA overly protective of someone? Why did the FIA not ask this terrorist the reason for extending death threat to my husband for making the video?
Copyright Business Recorder, 2020
Comments
Comments are closed.