SCMR 2012

2012SCMR909 (PLP)

N/A

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Criminal Original Petition No.6 of 2012 in Suo Motu Case No.4 of 2010, decided on 26th April, 2012.
Honorable Judges
Nasir-ul-Mulk, Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Sarmad Jalal Osmany, Ejaz Afzal Khan, Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry, Gulzar Ahmed and Muhammad Athar Saeed, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2012SCMR909 (PLP)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Nasir-ul-Mulk, Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Sarmad Jalal Osmany, Ejaz Afzal Khan, Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry, Gulzar Ahmed and Muhammad Athar Saeed, JJ
Parties N/A
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012SCMR909 (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2012SCMR909 (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Nasir-ul-Mulk, Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Sarmad Jalal Osmany, Ejaz Afzal Khan, Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry, Gulzar Ahmed and Muhammad Athar Saeed, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2012SCMR909 (PLP) (N/A). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan

Representation

  • Barrister Aitzaz Ahsan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, assisted by Barrister Gohar Ali Khan, Shaukat Ali Javid, Shahid Saeed, Kashif Malik, Bilal Khokar, Ms. Zunaira Fayyaz, Ms. Ayesha Malik, Fahad Usman, Tayyab Jan, Ch. Babras, Advocates with M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent.
  • Dates of hearing: 19th January, Ist, 2nd, 13th, 22nd, 28th February, 7th, 8th, 21st, 22nd, 26th, 27th March, 12th, 13th, 16th to 20th, 24th and 26th April of 2012.

Headnotes / Summary

(Contempt proceedings against Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani, the Prime Minister of Pakistan regarding noncompliance of this Court's order dated 16-1-2012).

Arts. 204 & 63(1)(g)

Contempt of Court Ordinance (V of 2003), Ss. 3 & 5

Contempt of Supreme Court

Wilful flouting, disregard and disobedience by the Prime Minister/Chief Executive of the directions given by the Supreme Court in the case of Dr. Mobashir Hassan v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 2010 SC 265)

Effect

Prime Minister/Chief Executive of the Federation was found guilty of, and convicted for, contempt of court under Art. 204(2) of the Constitution read with S.3 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 on the satisfaction of the Supreme Court that the contempt committed was substantially detrimental to the administration of justice and tended to bring the Supreme Court and the judiciary into ridicule

Supreme Court observed that its findings and the conviction for contempt for court were . likely to entail some serious consequences in terms of Art.63(1)(g) of the Constitution which might be treated as mitigating factors towards the sentence to be passed against the Prime Minister/Chief Executive

Prime Minister/Chief Executive was punished under S.5 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003, with imprisonment till rising of the court

Order accordingly. Dr. Mobahsir Hassan v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 2010 SC 265 ref. Irfan Qadir, Prosecutor/Attorney-General for Pakistan for the Prosecution.

Judgment & Decree

For the reasons to be recorded later the accused Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani, Prime Minister of Pakistan/Chief Executive of the Federation, is found guilty of and convicted for contempt of court under Article 204(2) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 read with section 3 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance (V of 2003) for wilful flouting, disregard and disobedience of this Court's direction contained in paragraph No.178 of the judgment delivered in the case of Dr. Mobashir Hassan v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 2010 SC 265) after our satisfaction that the contempt committed by him is substantially detrimental to the administration of justice and tends to bring this Court and the judiciary of this country into ridicule.

2. As regards the sentence to be passed against the convict we note that the findings and the conviction for contempt of court recorded above are likely to entail some serious consequences in terms of Article 63(1)(g) of the Constitution which may be treated as mitigating factors towards the sentence to be passed against him. He is, therefore, punished under section 5 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance (V of 2003) with imprisonment till the rising of the court today. M.W.A./S-7/SC Order accordingly.