The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday issued a show-cause notice to PTI Chairman and deposed premier Imran Khan in a contempt of court case over his remarks against female Additional Sessions Judge Zeba Chaudhry and asked him to appear personally before the bench on August 31.
The court issued a three-page written order and sent a notice to attorney general for Pakistan for assistance in the case.
Imran’s controversial remarks against the judge were also made part of the written order.
“Magistrate Zeba sahiba, you should get ready. We will also take action against you. All of you should be ashamed of yourselves,” the IHC written order quoted Imran as saying.
On Saturday, Imran while addressing a rally at Islamabad’s F-9 park alleged that Judge Zeba Chaudhry knew that incarcerated party leader Shahbaz Gill was tortured, but she did not release him on bail. He had threatened to take action against the judge and the Islamabad IGP and DIG.
Read Govt sends mixed signals on arresting Imran Khan
The former premier was booked in a terrorism case on the complaint of Islamabad Saddar Magistrate Ali Javed for threatening the additional sessions judge.
The first information report (FIR) was lodged with the Margalla police station at 10pm, Saturday. The FIR also carried Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act.
The FIR was lodged hours before another Islamabad police station received a written complaint from a resident of G-11/2 for lodging a case against the PTI chief over making hate speeches, and inciting rebellion against the army, police and judiciary.
The FIR lodged by the Margalla police said that the PTI chairman had threatened the additional sessions judge with a view to terrorise the high officials of the police and the judiciary so that they could not fulfil their duties and refrain from taking action against the PTI due to fear of Imran.
On Tuesday, a three-member larger bench led by Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani and comprising Justice Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb and Justice Babar Sattar heard the case.
In the written order, the IHC stated that the registrar had submitted a report of Imran’s Islamabad F9 park’s speech on August 22.
The court said that the PTI chairman in his speech made prima facie “contemptuous and intimidating” statements against Judge Zeba, who was working under the administrative control of the IHC.
It was said that the statements were made in a pending case related to Gill.
The written order said that Imran had filed a plea in the high court against Judge Zeba’s decision, adding that the PTI supremo tried to “obstruct” the course of justice and “erode” public confidence in the court.
Read more IHC grants Imran protective bail till August 25 in terrorism case
Imran’s statement falls under the “ambit of contempt of court”, the written order said.
The IHC further noted that the PTI chief’s remarks “undermined” the integrity and credibility of the judicial system in the eyes of public.
The court said that Imran was being issued a notice under Section 17 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance and a show-cause as to why proceedings for contempt of court should not be initiated against him.
The court ordered that the notice be sent to Imran through Bani Gala SHO. The court further directed Pemra chairman to submit a complete transcript of the PTI chief’s F-9 park speech.
The court said that it was sending the case to the IHC chief justice for the constitution of a larger bench of more than three judges.
Earlier in the day, Islamabad Advocate General Jahangir Jadoon filed a separate application seeking to make Imran's statement against the sessions judge a part of the contempt proceedings.
In his petition, Jadoon had stated that he wanted to bring the videos of the former premier’s statements on record therefore his statements on electronic and digital media should also be made part of the case.
It was argued that the statements by Imran should be allowed to be played in the courtroom as they would help in the process of reaching a decision in the matter.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ