1976 P Cr (PLP)

‑‑‑ S. 3‑Contempt proceedings‑Respondent a complainant in a, criminal case pending before trial Magistrate, sending applications to Prime Minister of Pakistan and Sessions Judge, containing scandalous allegation against Presiding Officer‑Respondent, however, disowning such applications and denying signatures of his own on them‑Disputed signatures found radically different from admitted and specimen signatures of respondent‑Notice recalled and vacated in circumstances. Muhammad Ali Shaikh and Advocate‑General Sind for the State. Date of hearing : 26th January 1976. These proceedings under section 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act of 1926 were initiated in the following circumstances : ‑ The respondent Muhammad Urs son of Ismail was complainant in a case pending before Mr. A. G. Gazdar, Civil Judge and First Class Magistrate, Moro. The case related to the commission of an attempted murder and dacoity. An application was made to the Prime Minister of Pakistan on 9‑6‑1975 wherein scandalous allegations were made against the Civil Judge and First Class Magistrate and copies of such application were forwarded to the Sessions Judge, Nawabshah. It is unnecessary to reiterate the allegations since the decision in these proceedings will have no bearing on such aspect of the case.

2. The learned Sessions Judge, Nawabshah called for a report from the Civil Judge and First Class Magistrate and in such report the allegations made in the application addressed to the Prime Minister, copy whereof was endorsed to the District and Sessions Judge, Nawabshah, were denied by the Civil Judge and First Class Magistrate. The Sessions Judge arrived at the conclusion that the allegations made were false and he therefore made a reference on the administrative side of this Court. The papers were placed by the Registrar before my Lord the Chief Justice and my Lord was pleased to order action on the judicial side. Notices were issued and respondent Muhammad Urs son of Muhammad Ismail is present in Court. The respondent has filed a reply which is supported by an affidavit wherein it is stated that he did not make any such application containing any allega tions against the Civil Judge and First Class Magistrate and he also denied that the signature on such document was his. In such circumstances, I have examined the signature of respondent Muhammad Urs on the affidavit filed in this Court, signature on Vakalatnama filed in this Court in the present proceedings. I have also obtained specimen signatures of the respondent in this Court which have been marked as X‑

1. Such signatures have been compared by me with the signature of "Muhammad Urs" on the application addressed to the Prime Minister of Pakistan and on the affidavit sent by post to the Registrar of this Court in obedience to the order of this Court on the administrative side. I am of the view that the signatures appearing on the application made to the Prime Minister of Pakistan as well as on the affidavit filed before the Registrar on the administrative side, which was sent by registered post and not presented personally, radically differ from the admitted signatures appearing on the affidavit filed in this Court, the Vakalatnama filed in this Court, and the specimen signatures obtained in this Court. Learned Advocate‑General and Mr. Muhammad Ali Shaikh who have assisted me on this aspect of this case are also of the same view.

3. In such circumstances, questions of fact are in serious dispute and in summary proceedings under section 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act, such disputed questions of fact cannot be resolved. In fact, denial by the respondent may also in circumstances of similar nature be sufficient for discharge of contempt notice. The notice under section.3 of the Contempt of Courts Act issued against respondent Muhammad Urs is hereby recalled and vacated. Reference not allowed.