ISLAMABAD  - An anchorperson of ARY TV Monday filed an application in the Supreme Court challenging Islamabad High Court’s (IHC) judgement that restrained him from conducting programme or appearing in any TV channel as guest.

Former Attorney General Irfan Qadir, counsel for Luqman Mubashir, filed the petition praying that leave to appeal kindly be granted to the petitioner against the IHC impugned order passed on June 11, 2014.

The petitioner made Shohada Foundation of Pakistan, the federation through secretary ministry of information and broadcasting and secretary ministry of interior, and chairman Pakistan Electronic Media and Regulatory Authority (Pemra) and Ammad Khalid of Geo TV channel as respondents.

The petitioner said the impugned order is arbitrary and whimsical since the learned judge has directed Pemra to prohibit Mubashir Luqman, anchorperson ARY, from conducting programme ‘Khara Sach’. He stated that the high court has no mandate to issue such a direction to Pemra.

The petitioner questioned whether the learned single judge was justified in passing the impugned order without adhering to the principles laid down by the superior courts of this country respecting the grant of interim relief or temporary injunctions according to which the basic ingredients of prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss ought to be addressed with reasons as a condition precedent to the grant of such relief.

The petitioner maintained that the impugned order is grossly illegal, as it would seriously undermine the independence of Pemra if the latter accepts such illegal interference in consequence of such order.

Reliance in this regard is placed on laws relating to electronic media, which clearly envisage that Pemra must apply its independent mind to every case, which it has jurisdiction to decide. Any departure from such an application of mind will also render any order passed by Pemra to be grossly illegal and more so when the same is the outcome of outside intervention.

The impugned order is tantamount to negating the spirit of articles 189 and 190 of the constitution, especially when the aforesaid programme is also the subject matter of proceedings presently pending in the Supreme Court and even the apex court despite having seen the video exercised restraint being conscious of the importance of freedom of speech and its jurisdictional limitations in tampering with such inalienable rights guaranteed by the constitution and also matters squarely falling in the domain of Pemra under the relevant statute, the petitioner added.

The petitioner further added that the order of the High Court is an indirect and illegal endeavour to prevent the telecast the programme. It is trite law when a law requires a thing to be done directly the same will not be accomplished indirectly. The IHC order is a nullity on this score as well, he said.