P L D 2018 Supreme Court 738 (PLP)

MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL, J.

After the pronouncement of judgment in the case of Imran Ahmad Khan Niazi v. Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, Prime Minister of Pakistan/Member National Assembly, Prime Minister's House, Islamabad and 9 others (PLD 2017 SC 265) (publically known as Panama Papers case) by this Court some of the members of the ruling party (PML-N) started maligning the integrity and independence of this Court. Amongst others, Mr. Daniyal Aziz, Federal Minister (the alleged Contemnor) who is a member of the ruling party (PML-N), had on three different times, with his acts, conduct and intention tried to defame, undermine and ridicule the authority of this Court, the administration of Law and also attempted to scandalize an Hon'ble Judge of this Court.

2. On 2.02.2018, the Registrar of this Court while referring to the statements made by Mr. Daniyal Aziz, Federal Minister, on 7.06.2017 and 12.06.2017 being contemptuous and derogatory in respect of this Hon`ble Court submitted a note to Hon'ble the Chief Justice of Pakistan for obtaining appropriate orders. On the same day i.e. 2.02.2018, the Hon'ble Chief Justice was pleased to pass the following order on the said note:-- "Besides the above statements and material; on account of many other statements, speeches of the above named, which should be collected by the Registrar of this Court in due course. Suo motu Proceedings in Contempt of the Court on account of the noted Article of the Constitution and Section 3 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance 2003 are initiated against Mr. Danial Aziz, Federal Minister. And the matter for hearing be listed before the bench headed by my brother HJ(4) on 7th Feb. 2018. After notice to Mr. Danial Aziz."

3. Pursuant to the order of Hon'ble the Chief Justice, press clippings and video clips of his speeches which were published by different newspapers and telecasted by different TV channels found contemptuous were gathered and notice under Article 204 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (the 'Constitution') read with Section 3 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 (the 'Ordinance') was issued to Mr. Daniyal Aziz, the alleged Contemnor, and the matter was registered as Criminal Original Petition No.10/2018.

4. The matter was fixed before the Bench for its first hearing on 7.02.2018. After perusal of his statement which was published in the newspaper Daily Dunya dated 9.09.2017, the transcript of his statement telecast on Neo TV on 15.12.2017 and his statement telecast on Dawn TV on 21.12.2017, this Court by considering the above stated material to be contemptuous within the meaning of Article 204 of the Constitution read with Section 3 of the Ordinance, therefore, Mr. Daniyal Aziz, the alleged Contemnor, was directed to show cause as to why he should not be proceeded against for contempt of Court.

5. Mr. Daniyal Aziz, the alleged contenmor, filed his reply to the Show Cause Notice dated 1.9.02.2018 through Cr

1. Misc. Application No.315/2018 by taking a stance that as a citizen of Islamic Republic of Pakistan and a parliamentarian he believes in the supremacy of the Constitution of the country and all the constitutional institutions including this Court rather this respect and regard is entrenched in his conduct and claimed that all the above said material was as per his believe was just under the impression of freedom of speech and nothing else as enshrined in Article 19 of the Constitution and he had no intention to defame, undermine and ridicule the authority of this Court.

6. As regard news item published in Daily Dunya dated 09.09.2017, it was denied and claimed to be "based on a patently incorrect reporting." As regard video clip of statement as telecast on NEO TV on 15.12.2017 he justified claiming judgment in case of Imran Khan and Jehangir Tareen case "was as per script" it was claimed "the statement was made extempore and in highly agitated environment". As regard video clip of Dawn TV as telecast on 21.12.2017, it was stated "a video of Respondents addressing a closed door political meeting", it was further defended by stating "the video clip represents an arbitrarily selected short piece of a much longer meeting and discussion, hence creating an incorrect impression out of context..." He prayed for the discharge of the Show Cause Notice.

7. This Court after perusing his reply, and hearing the Additional Attorney General for Pakistan and Mr. Muhammad Ali Raza learned ASC for the alleged conterrmor vide order dated 6th March 2018 observed that "we are not persuaded to terminate the proceedings as we are prima facie, satisfied that the interest of justice require that we may proceed further in the matter" and decided to frame charge against him and consequently, charge against the alleged Contemnor Mr. Daniyal Aziz was framed on 13.03.2018 which for ready reference is reproduced herein below:- CHARGE We hereby charge you (Daniyal Aziz son of Anwar Aziz) as follows:- (i) That on 08.09.2017, while addressing a Press Conference in the Pakistan Information Department (PID) you uttered the following words, which are published in the daily DUNYA on 09.09.2017: - (ii) That you also uttered the following words, which were telecast on 15.12.2017, on NEO TV:- (iii) That you also uttered the following words, which were telecast on 21.12.2017 on DAWN TV:- That your above mentioned acts tend to scandalize this Court and its Judges and bring its authority into hatred, ridicule, disrespect and you thereby obstructed, interfered with and prejudiced the process of law and due course of proceedings of the Supreme Court of Pakistan and by doing so have committed Contempt of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, within the meaning of Article 204(2) of the Constitution. of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, read with Section 3 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 (Ordinance V of 2003) punishable under Section 5 of the said Ordinance of 2003, which is cognizable by this Court.

2. We thus proceed to try you on the above said charges. Islamabad 13th March, 2018" Mr. Daniyal Aziz, alleged contemnor, pleaded not guilty to the above charges and opted to produce evidence in his defence.

8. Prosecution in order to bring home the guilt of the alleged contemnor Mr. Daniyal Aziz, produced Haji Adam son of Haji Sahib Khan, Director General (Monitoring), PEMRA as PW.1 and Mr. Sajid Hussain son of Chaudhry Muhammad Siddique, Journalist, Daily Dunya (newspaper) as PW.2. Mr. Daniyal Aziz, the alleged contemnor, in his defense produced Mr. Kashif Jabbar, Executive Producer of Dawn News, Karachi as DW.1. He chose not to be examined on Oath. However, his statement under Section 342 Cr.P.C. was recorded.

9. To establish Charge No.1, reported above, the prosecution produced Mr. Sajid Hussain son of Chaudhry Muhammad Siddique, Journalist/reporter, Daily Dunya (newspaper) as PW.2 who produced exhibit PW.2/1 a report published in Daily Dunya, Islamabad on 9th September, 2017 wherein it has been reported as under: - PW.2 was cross-examined by the learned defence counsel.

10. Now adverting to Charge No.(ii) words, which were telecast on 15.12.2017; on NEO TV: - Prosecution to prove above charge through Haji Akram, DG (Monitoring), PEMRA, PW-1 produced the video clip of statement of Daniyal Aziz as aired on NEO Television on 15.1.2.2017 in a CD recording (Exh.P.1) along with its transcript (Exh.P.1/2-A). The video clip (Exh.P1/2) was also played in the Court room.

11. Prosecution in order to establish the charge No.(iii) produced Haji Adam, Director General (Monitoring), PEMRA as PW-1 who produced footage of speech of Federal Minister, Mr. Daniyal Aziz in News Bulletin of 19.12.2017 (instead of 21-12-2017 at 9.23 PM as telecasted on Dawn TV produced as Exh.P-1/3, whereby maligning and accusing one of the Hon'ble Member of the Bench of this Court that heard the Panama case in a most contemptuous and disparaging manner. Alleged Contemnor did not deny such utterance (Exh.P-1/3). Learned ASC for the alleged Contemnor retaliated that it is a "a video of Respondents addressing a closed door political meeting", He further justified by stating that "the video clip represents an arbitrarily selected short piece of a much longer meeting and discussion, hence creating an incorrect impression out of context..." He also sought refuge behind his improved defense plea made in 342 Cr.P.C. statement claiming it to be "beeped out". Prosecution not only played such video clip (Exh.P-1/3) in the Court room, but also read out its transcript. In support of his stance, that such clip was edited version and not the actual recording of his utterance or beeped out he produced Mr. Kashif Jabbar, Executive Producer of Dawn News, Karachi as DW.1 in his defense.

12. His statement recorded under Section 342 Cr.P.C. is reproduced for ready reference: "Statement of Daniyal Aziz son of Anwar Aziz, Federal Minister/alleged contemnor under Section 342 Cr.P.C.(without oath) Q.1 It is in the evidence that you held the Press Conference on 08.9.2017 at PID (Exh-P1/1). A. Yes. It is correct. Q.2 It is in the evidence that you made a statement (Exh-P-1/2), which was telecast on NEO TV Channel on 15.12.2017. A. Yes. It is correct Q.3 It is in the evidence that you made a statement (Exh.P-1/3) which was telecast on Dawn TV Channel on 19.12.2017? A. I cannot respond, as it is mostly beeped out. Q.4 It is in evidence that these statements attributed to you constitute contempt of Court. A. I have spent my life defending independence of judiciary and struggled for separation of judiciary from executive, which remained unimplemented, until amendments in 2000-2001. There is much more to tell about my services for judiciary. With this background, I could never even contemplate to commit contempt. I deny that I have committed any contempt of Court. R.O.& A.C. 24.4.2018 " At the conclusion of trial, arguments of the learned Deputy Attorny General/ Prosecutor and learned ASC for the alleged contenmor were heard and evidence perused,

13. Mr. Wagar Rana learned DAG, contended that the alleged Contemnor has not denied the contemptuous statements and utterances made by him, as printed and published widely in print media and telecasted on electronic media, no explanation or justification has been offered that may exonerate him from charge of contempt maligning the judiciary. According to him the contemptuous utterances scandalized the apex court, and one of the Honouable Judge which tend to bring the Court and Judge on the bench hearing the Panama case into hatred, ridicule amounting to gravest form of contempt. He prays that the alleged Condemner, who is occupying senior cadre of leadership in his political party be handed down maximum dose of punishment.

14. Mr. Ali Raza learned ASC for the alleged condemner, denied that any contempt has been committed by the alleged Contemnor, according to him, has a long history of political struggle for the supremacy of law and independence of judiciary, he cannot imagine to commit contempt of an institution, which he holds in high esteem.

15. Mr. Ali Raza learned ASC for the alleged Contemnor, addressing the court with reference to Charge No. (i) has drawn our attention towards the deposition of prosecution witness PW-2 more particularly his cross-examination, first two questions and answers are very relevant, which are reproduced as under: - Q.No.1. Is it correct the words pertaining to the preparation of the references by or on the instructions of the Monitoring Judge were never said by Daniyal Aziz in the Press Conference? Answer: On the basis of the statement made, this was the impression I drew and reported it as such; the matter came up at the tail end of the Press Conference, hence, no explanation could be solicited from Daniyal Aziz, perhaps, the exact words may not have been uttered. Q. No.2 Is it correct that the exact words that the Monitoring Judge summoned the Members of the Executive Board and directed them to prepare the References, which were not uttered by Daniyal Aziz. Answer: I have already stated that it is the perception I gathered from the Press Conference; volunteered that I primarily covered economic and finance affairs for the last 23 years and not the political side of the news since Daniyal Aziz was the Minister for Privatization. I was present at the Press Conference".

16. It was contended by Mr. Ali Raza that the publication in Daily Dunya forming basis of charge No.(i), it was admitted by the witness ".....was the impression I drew and reported it as such;" is sufficient to discredit the alleged charge No.(i) against the alleged contemnor and he cannot be saddled with the contemptuous reported/published news item attributed to him, as the reported news was merely reporter/ witness's own impression and not that of Mr. Daniyal Aziz.

17. Contention of the learned ASC for the alleged Contemnor fully supports the stance of defense. Contemptuous words attributed to the alleged Contemnor as published in Daily Dunya Exh-P1/1 are merely the impression of the reporter, which is indeed worst example of misreporting. In this view of the matter, we are of the view that prosecution has failed to prove and establish the first charge against the alleged contemnor. Accordingly Charge No.(i) is dropped against the alleged contemnor.

18. Adverting to Charge No.(ii) learned Additional AG, contended that such a brazen statement is nothing short of contempt of court, according to him, there is no denial rather admission on the part of alleged Contemnor, the justification to settle score with political opponent, contemptuous disposition towards court is not acceptable. He urged that alleged contemnor be committed for contempt.

19. Learned Counsel for the alleged Contemnor, argued that the alleged contemptuous portion of the statement forming basis of charge No.(ii) was uttered extempore in a highly agitated and charged environment surrounding the respondent, which was made immediately after the announcement of the judgment by the Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Jehangir Tareen and Imran Khan. It was further urged that there was neither any prepared material with Mr. Daniyal Aziz nor was there any intent to commit contempt, it was a bona fide expression against his political opponents. He urged that no case for contempt is made out.

20. Considered the arguments, justification offered that the contemptuous utterances were made in a heat of the situation after the announcement of judgment passed against Jahangir Tareen and exonerating his political opponent Imran Khan, is no legal justification. Alleged Contemnor is a senior political leader, is not only expected but required to act in a responsible and prudent manner. While exchanging barbs with his arch political rival, dragging apex Court in a scandalous manner, which tends to ridicule and bring the authority of the Court and the administration of law into disrespect or disrepute to bring the court into hatred, ridicule and contempt. We, in the circumstances, are of the considered view that the charge No.(ii) is established and proved and Mr. Daniyal Aziz is accordingly held liable to have committed Contempt of Court, within the meaning of Article 204(2)(b) of the Constitution read with Section 3 of the Ordinance.

21. Adverting to Charge No. (iii), Alleged Conternnor did not deny such utterance (Exh.P-1/3). Learned ASC for the alleged Contemnor retaliated that it is a "a video of Respondents addressing a closed door political meeting", He further justified by stating that "the video clip represents an arbitrarily selected short piece of a much longer meeting and discussion, hence creating an incorrect impression out of context..." He also sought refuge behind his improved defense plea made in 342 Cr.P.C. statement claiming it to be "beeped out". Prosecution not only played such video clip (Exh.P-1/3) in the Court room, but also read out its transcript. In support of his stance, that such clip was edited version and not the actual recording of his utterance or that it was "beeped out" he produced Mr. Kashif Jabbar, Executive Producer of Dawn News, Karachi as DW.1 in his defense.

22. DW-1 in reply to a specific question i.e. Question No.2 clarified the position and categorically stated that the contents of the video clip (Exh.P-1/3) were not edited one, the proceeding and question No.2 and its answer is recorded as follows: "At the request of the learned counsel for the alleged contemnor, the video clip Ex-P/3 has been played in Court" Q.2. Is this video clip edited? A The contents have not been edited, only the in and out has been edited. It is clarified that the portions that had to be shown has been taken but what has been telecast has not been edited." To cross-examination of learned Addl AGP/Prosecutor, DW-1 responded as follows; The raw video clip i.e the entire recording from which the video clip in question has been taken, is available with Dawn TV Channel"

23. Contentions of Mr. Ali Raza, learned ASC for the alleged contemnor, that either the video clip containing contemptuous content of his speech as aired on Dawn TV, were either edited and or beeped out was not established and his own witness DW-1, did not support him on this count, thus the charge No (iii) as framed against him was fully proved and established.

24. We are fully aware of the fact that trial for Contempt of Court proceedings are not a stricto sensu criminal trial under Criminal Procedure Code but are sui generis in nature partaking some of the elements of both civil and criminal proceedings. Just to meet the ends of justice all the incriminating and contemptuous utterance and as reported in print media as well as on TV channels attributed to him was brought on the record and put to him and he was also provided a chance to defend himself by recording his statement under Section 342 Cr.P.C. but nothing material was brought on the record to rebut the evidence led by the prosecution except the statement of DW.I, who did not support him. This makes clear that the alleged contemnor made all the statement as telecasted on Neo TV as well as on Dawn TV as record in Charge Nos.(ii) and (iii) said all which has been shown in the video clip noted in charge Nos.(ii) and (iii) as reproduced above and he could not deny any of its contents. Therefore, in our opinion, the charge is proved and established and he is guilty of the offence.

25. The ordinary and normal practice of the Courts is to show judicial restraint in such like matter. The utterance made by the alleged contemnor, cannot be treated as just and fair comments on the judgment of the court and or on the conduct of honourable judge of this Court, even otherwise no such plea or defense was raised in instant case, alleged Contemnor has repeated his contemptuous behavior and made repeated attempts and attacks on the judicial system, judiciary and one of the honourable judge of this Court. A politician of the stature of alleged contemnor having fairly large public following, having access to social. media, print media and the electronic media by way of addressing public gatherings, or press conferences are expected to be more careful in selection of words and should use a very guarded language being more exposed to the general public should act like role models of the masses but an overall picture which appears on the canvas is very gloomy and melancholic, which is a very unfortunate.

26. Fair comments about the general working of the Court made in good faith in the public interest and in temperate language without impugning the integrity or impartiality of a Judge would not amount to a contemptuous act. Purpose of contempt proceedings is not to wreck vengeance or it is never the question of ego of a judge to punish such person but to vindicate honour and dignity of the Court so as to keep and strengthen the confidence of the general public in the judicial system and to keep justice system far from pollution and obstructions.

27. While reverting back to the facts and circumstances of the case in hand and seen in the above backdrop, we have no hesitation in our minds that above quoted material is contemptuous in nature and do constitutes the Contempt of Court as the factum of defaming, undermining and ridiculing the authority of this Court for which alleged contemnor is charged with and administration of law and scandalized an honourable judge of this Court Charge No. (ii) has been fully proved and established. Besides the above, charge No. (iii) whereby character of an Honourable Judge of this Court who remained member of five member Bench in the case of Imran Ahmad Khan Niazi (supra) was also ridiculed and scandalized.

28. In view of the foregoing, we found that the alleged contemnor is guilty of charge to scandalize this Court and its judges and bring its authdrity into hatred, ridicule, disrespect and thereby obstructed, interfered with and prejudiced the process of law and due course of proceedings of this Court and we are satisfied that the contempt committed by the alleged contemnor herein, for which he is charged with (charge Nos. (ii) and (iii) have been proved to have been committed, which is substantially detrimental to the administration of justice and tantamounts to scandalizes the court and tend to bring the court and the Judge of this Court into hatred and ridicule, thus the contemnor has made him liable to be committed for Contempt of Court within the contemplation of Article 204(2)(b) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 read with Section 3 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 (Ordinance V of 2003) punishable under sectin 5 of the said Ordinance. However, taking a lenient view of the matter, we convict him under section 5 of the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 and sentence him with imprisonment till the rising of the Coiurt today. MWA/S-30/S Order accordingly.