ISLAMABAD - The Islamabad High Court (IHC) Monday turned down a petition seeking court’s directions to put former chief justice of Gilgit-Baltistan (G-B) Rana Shamim’s name on the Exit Control List (ECL).
Besides this, a single bench of IHC comprising Chief Justice Athar Minallah also rejected another application filed by the petitioner – a Supreme Court lawyer Rai Muhammad Khara, seeking the court’s permission to become a party in the contempt of court case against the former top judge of GB.
The applicant appeared before the court in person. The IHC bench noted in its verdict that the nature of proceedings under Article 204 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 read with the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 are confined to matters between the court and the alleged contemnor(s).
“It is for the court to determine whether an act or publication was calculated to lower the authority of a court or judge; to interfere with due course of administration of justice or the lawful process of the court. Contempt proceedings are not meant to protect the shame of a judge, rather, its exercise can be justified only on the touchstone of public interest,” said the bench.
The bench stated that the applicant has invoked section 561-A of Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) for being impleaded as a party while a plain reading of the said provision unambiguously shows that the scope of inherent powers of a High Court are confined to three eventualities; (i) when making an order is necessary to give effect to an order under CrPC, (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court, or (iii) to secure the ends of justice.
The IHC chief justice said that perusal of the assertions made in the application seeking impleadment as a necessary party clearly shows that none of the three eventualities set out in section 561-A of CrPC are attracted in the context of the pending contempt proceedings.
He maintained that for reasons discussed above, the application praying for impleadment as a necessary party in the pending contempt proceedings is misconceived and not maintainable.
