- Justice Minallah terms criminal disrespect is a serious matter that has no justification
- Both amicus, PBC representative offer one more opportunity for Imran for unconditional apology
ISLAMABAD: Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday expressed dissatisfaction with additional reply submitted former prime minister and Pakistani Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan and decided to indict him in contempt of a court case on September 22nd.
IHC is bigger bench led by Chief Justice Athar Minalla and composed of Judges Miangul Hasan Aurangzeb, Judges Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Judges Tariq Mahmud Jahangiri and Judges Babar Sattar heard of contempt of a court case against Imran after his remarks against Judge of additional sessions Zeba Chaudhry.
During the IHC hearing bench expressed dissatisfaction over Imran’s addition reply in contempt case party the chief’s statement is “incitement”.
Both amicus offered IHC discharge show cause notification against in former prime minister and even the representative of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC), Akhtar Hussain, asked the court to give another opportunity for Imran for making an unconditional apology. However, the IHC unanimously decided to indict him.
former prime minister was present in court with his lawyer is Hamid Khan.
“According to the court, we submitted replyHamid said, referring to Imran’s statement in this case.
After IHC show cause mind you former prime minister introduced second written reply yesterday, expressing deep regret for “unintentional” words he said about the judge. “There will be no shame in expressing regret to the judge for My words,” said the PTI leader.
Hamid claimed that his client wanted question should be closed what was mentioned in written reply to court.
He also said that during the trial on On August 31, the court ruled over cases of Danial Aziz and Talal Chaudhry. He added what would he explain how The Imran case was different from the Supreme Court case. decisions.
“I will also place in decision of Supreme Court in case of Imran Khan in court,” he said. IHC CJ Minallah said the goal was to highlight three solutions of Supreme Court that in Firdous Ashik Avan case, three types of contempt of trial, and that Talal Chaudhry’s case was not criminal contempt of court.
Main justice confirmed that criminal contempt of the trial was serious and intent could not be mentioned in It. Further, he stated that counsel was said during last Hearing that this link was of criminal contempt of court.
CJ Minallah claimed there was no criminal contempt proceedings against Daniyal Aziz or Talal Chaudhry, and that the Supreme Court was bound by the highest court. decisions.
Imran counsel repeated that they wanted close this case and submitted reports with greatest respect.
“The court gave another opportunity to which reply was filed,” Hamid said.
Judge Minallah stated that criminal disrespect was a serious matter that had no justification.
“We are the defenders of freedom of expression, but incitement cannot be allowed. AT criminal contempt, you can’t refer to your intentions,” he said.
On the direction of court, Hamid read part of case of the Supreme Court.
Main justice claimed that the PTI leader was trying give excuses in his answer and asked if there former the prime minister could justify that the IHC court did not know law.
“We should follow law, no one can influence us”, he said, adding that great crime was committed but not implemented of It.
PTI’s lawyer argued that he was not justifying the answer, but was stating his position. forward.
Judge Minallah noticed that there were so many division within a society that opponents can offend in public places. “If this happens to the judge, what will happen?” – he asked.
Nothing good It happened in 70 years old, said CJ, asking the lawyer if he wanted to justify former prime minister’s statement. To this, Hamid replied that he intended to explain, not substantiate, the claim.
He asked if Imran had reply it would be the same if such comments were made about the judge of Supreme Court. Judge Babar Sattar wondered how political leader could stand up in a public get together and declare a lawsuit against referee.
Hamid, in his arguments, said he submitted additional. reply preservation in view observations of IHC. “We are seeking closure of business, he added again.
CJ IHC stated that Imran’s statement regarding the judge was “incitement”, while Judge Babar Sattar stated that Imran’s subsequent conduct was not show no harm to the judge.
Judge Sattar argued that even after the speech and disrespect of court case, justifications continued to be presented in Imran’s speeches.
The judge said Imran had used the word “shameful” and told his lawyer that he in very risky position. “The case of Nihal Hashmi was similar, it was a threat without the name of the judge,” said CJ Minallah, adding that Hashmi apologized, but the SC did not consider his apology.
Meanwhile, the head of PTI could be seen praying on his tasbih (rosary) during the hearing. Hamid told Imran wanted take the podium to explain his speech yesterday, which, according to him, was “incorrectly transmitted.”
Judge Minallah said the threats to the district judge were more serious crime how to threaten a Supreme Court judge. He stated that much had been said about the Supreme Court and how it’s never been condescending of litigation, but what current the case was “completely different”.
bench Hamid once asked again if he wanted to fight case, giving justifications for which counsel replied that he was simply explaining the essence of the matter, and did not give justifications.
“If our court rules against someone and he was standing outside and said he wouldn’t leave the judge, is that okay?” Judge Sattar asked.
The judge argued that the PTI leader was repeatedly told that this was a serious matter and that the political leader had a huge responsibility for the words he or she used.
Contacting a lawyer next him, Imran once again asked if he could come up to the podium.
Main justice further asked if their impression or writ would prevail, to which Hamid replied that it would not direction he wished take it rather wanted case is closed.
“There was no intention of threatening the lady judge. If the judge was threatened, we express our regret,” he said. The court argued that the reference was to a district court judge and not to a “female judge”.
Lawyer Hamid replied that the attempt was made to give the impression that this is a gender issue on which Judge Minallah stated that the lawyer was talking about social media again.
“Has any political leader spoken to date social media refrain from offending? Leadership responsible for this is. Everyone is spreading propaganda through social media,” he said.
He also added that the judiciary was the biggest target of social media propaganda.
Hamid then stated that his client was equally respected. for higher and lower judiciary.
“In the case of Firdous Ashik Avan, the court said that there may not be awareness, but at the moment you cannot accept this argument, as it will not pass. in your grace,” advised CJ Minallah. He also asked if the PTI leader had said that social media cannot be abused.
Judge Sattar argued that in his reply Imran stated that he knew the appeal already was filed.
Main justice asked if they have faith in in system or they will do everything decisions at political rallies.
Judge Sattar ordered to read of paragraph four of in reply Hamid, and then asked if this was a deliberate attempt to forestall an appeal.
“This court has never paid attention of outrageous, no one can influence us and what people tell about us daily on social media does not affect usCJ said, adding that Judge Sattar dismissed the contempt petition. against PTI leader Fawad Chaudhary two days ago, although his statement was more grave.
Hamid said he knew of what. Meanwhile, Imran Khan repeatedly spoke with lawyer Shoaib Shaheen is sitting next For him.
Happening of criminal contempt can be formed against you are the boss justice said.
He further stated that if “disrespect of court” was used for things people said it would occur every day, so the court rarely took notification of what he was told and emphasized that the punishments given by the SC in contempt of there were few lawsuits.
They claimed that current it was one of judicial and criminal contempt, which was a very delicate matter.
The court then called Attorney General Ashtar Asif to the podium when Hamid Khan’s arguments were concluded.
“We have repeatedly used the word “regret”. in additional answer, everything that was said was unintentional with no intention of contempt of court,” Hamid said, claiming they never thought of contempt of court.
“We will be careful with legal in in future”, he decided.
Speaking at the podium, Attorney General Ashtar Ausaf said a higher court pardoned a similar incident eight years ago and now offenders believe they can repeat the same thing. mistake and be pardoned forever.
He claimed that the testimony should were sent with Imran reply.
“Intention and Purpose of slanderer are very important,” said A. G. Ausaf, adding that in 2014, contempt of the case was also filed against imran, with similar fees and procedures.
He stressed that the allegations against Imran was rejected. The AG argument was left incomplete, as the court called the assistant judges to the podium.
Associate Judge Makhdoom Ali Khan spoke from the podium. public interest lies in delivery of justice and said the same present in freedom of speech.
Giving an example of USA and former President Donald Trump, Khan said Trump convened the Supreme Court decision worst, but the U.S. Supreme Court exercised restraint and demanded another path. He added what was said party chief during public the fee may affect the litigation system.
Chief justice, responding to an assistant judge, said that PTI has been threatening the court since start of proceedings in a business.
“We want do one clear you, the behavior that should were seen after contempt of was not present at the court session,” said the head justice.
“You want us accept their explanation?
Khan told the court should give respite to Imran in a business. bench then asked the assistant referee for his opinion, to which he replied that Imran reply which was sent should be accepted.
“Remorse expressed in this case,” Khan said, adding that the court could “give one chance Imran”, wrapping up his argument.
Security measures
Strict security measures were made before the hearing with strong police presence in in region and the road to VVK is blocked with barbed wire.
Tolerance of court correspondents, including lawyers, in the courtroom, subject to pass from the registry office.
talking to media personnel outside court, Imran was asked comment on security situation prior to the hearing.
“It was as if Kulbhushan Yadav was walking,” he remarked, adding that he did not know. of what everyone was afraid of of.
When asked if he would apologize for Commenting on the judge of the additional hearings, Imran joked that he would not do anything without the permission of the journalist.
PTI lawyers stopped journalists from further questions.
Imran expresses disappointment at not being able to watch Pakistan vs Afghanistan match cricket match last night. He claimed he would talk to reporters after the hearing.
PTI members, court personnel arrive
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) Chief Minister Mahmoud Khan arrived at the IHC before the hearing and was not allowed to enter the court. He was joined PTI leaders Ali Awan, Raja Khurram Nawaz, Murad Said, Fawad Chaudhary and others.
PTI members started chanting loud slogans in front of hearing.
Assistant referee and senior Attorney Munir Malik also reached the Supreme Court of Islamabad. Islamabad Attorney General Jahangir Jadoun and Attorney General Ishtar Asif also arrived in the courtroom soon after.
the projector was also installed in courtroom
