Police officers walk past the Supreme Court of Pakistan building in Islamabad, Pakistan April 6, 2022. REUTERS
ISLAMABAD:
The Supreme Court has ruled that a charge cannot be brought against an alleged detractor without first granting a preliminary hearing in contempt cases.
In a three-page judgment penned by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazahar, while hearing a contempt case, the court observed that a perusal of the relevant section of the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 clearly shows that the alleged detractor must be given an opportunity of preliminary hearing before taking cognizance or fixing a date for framing of charge.
It added that after being duly satisfied that there is a prima facie case, the court may then set a date for the presentation of charges in open court and proceed to decide the case.
A three-judge bench headed by Justice Muhammad Ali Mazahar heard the case.
The case relates to a person who allegedly violated the order dated 03.09.2024 passed by the Sindh High Court (SHC) in its original jurisdiction.
The plaintiff, who is the respondent in this criminal appeal, filed an application for contempt of court under section 204 of and clauses 3 and 4 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003.
After notice, a counter affidavit was filed. The single judge of the SHC observed that Section 17(3) of the Ordinance requires a date to be fixed for framing of the charge and therefore fixed December 11, 2024 for framing of the charge, after issuing notice to the Advocate General Sindh for his appearance to assist the court.
Aggrieved, the petitioner challenged the order through an internal appeal, which was decided on 19 November 2024, with a direction to the parties to appear before the single judge for further proceedings.
However, the Oversight Committee noted that the single judge in this case, immediately without giving the opportunity for a preliminary hearing, directly set a date for the indictment.
“In our view, there are some errors apparent on the face of the record and this crucial issue has also been overlooked by the learned Division Bench while disposing of the High Court Appeal,” the order said.
The court overruled both high court rulings to the extent of contempt proceedings.
As far as the contempt petition is concerned, it will remain pending and if the court wishes to institute contempt proceedings, it may, after allowing a preliminary hearing based on the contempt application and the counter-affidavit filed by the alleged contempt, decide whether a prima facie case of contempt should be asserted in accordance with law.
The complaint is upheld under the above conditions, the ruling reads.
