IHC disposes of contempt case against Fawad

Petitioner withdraws petition against minister’s anti-judicial statement


Our Correspondent July 03, 2021
Islamabad High Court. PHOTO: IHC WEBSITE

print-news
ISLAMABAD:

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Friday disposed of contempt of court case filed against Federal Information Minister Fawad Chaudhry for commenting against the judiciary over its decision to remove the National Bank of Pakistan president and banning TikTok after the petitioner withdrew his plea.

During the hearing on Thursday, the court said that the decision taken two days ago (removal of the NBP president) will be implemented if it goes to the government. “If the decision is not complied with, you can file a contempt of court petition again.”

During the proceedings on Friday, GM Chaudhry Advocate apprised the court that the government did not implement the decision to remove NBP President Arif Usmani from office.

“The government spokespersons are critical of the ruling. Secondly, Usmani is still the president of NBP.”
Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani remarked that the appointment of NBP president has become illegal and he can no longer work.

The lawyer said, “Fawad Chaudhry's anti-judicial statement has also appeared in major newspapers and on Twitter.”

The court remarked that press statements do nothing and inquired about the government spokespersons’ statements.

Informing the court about Fawad’s tweet and press statements, the lawyer said, “If such statements are made on the decisions of the courts, then it is not correct.”

The court remarked that two days after the verdict, “you came with a contempt of court petition”.
The lawyer said that if Fawad’s statement had not come, we would not have brought the contempt petition.
Justice Kayani remarked, “I neither read the newspaper nor watch TV.”

The court disposed of the case on the basis of withdrawal of the petition by the petitioner's lawyer.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ