State vs IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI Ss — 2023 PLD 145 ISLAMABAD

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

State VS IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI Ss. 3 & 5---Contempt proceedings---apology, tendering of---Satisfaction of Court---Pre-conditions---Respondent/contemnor was a politician who during a public speech passed derogatory remarks against a Judge conducting a criminal trial---High Court issued contempt notice to respondent/contemnor who tendered his apology to the words used by him during public speech---Validity---Question of tendering an apology becomes relevant when Court upon conclusion of proceedings was satisfied that charge of contempt had been established, and no case was made out to extend benefit of doubt---Satisfaction of Court was the foundational principle in such regard---apology might not be expressly tendered, but Court could be satisfied that its bona fides stood impliedly established by conduct or written submissions of contemnor---Satisfaction of Court could not be restricted to any particular mode, form or nature of an apology---Court was to be satisfied that contemnor regretfully acknowledged having committed contempt and such acknowledgment must appeared to be bona fide---Court could be satisfied, even if an unconditional apology was not been tendered---Speech of respondent/contemnor was not followed by any other action and only actus reus was speech in question---High Court declined to refuse extending benefit of doubt to respondent/contemnor---Conduct of respondent/contemnor unambiguously manifested acurative effect---High Court did not dispute bona fide of regretful acknowledgment on the part of respondent/contemnor manifested through his conduct, tendering appearances before High Court explaining his stance and reiterating it by executing affidavit in apology---Despite extending benefit of doubt, the apology tended by respondent/contemnor was bona fide and High Court did not form a different opinion---High court discharged respondent/contemnor from contempt notice---Contempt proceedings were withdrawn in circumstances. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 145 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case State VS IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI Ss. 3 & 5---Contempt proceedings---Court, duty of---attributes of grace, magnanimity and forgiveness, inherent to status of Court are a safeguard against conviction and sentencing for contempt when curative effect of proceedings becomes obvious. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 145 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case State VS IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI S. 18---Contempt proceedings---Substantial detriment---Satisfaction of Court---Scope--- Citation Name: 2023 PLD 145 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case State VS IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI S. 5---Contempt proceedings---apology, tendering of---Influence, use of---Contemnor must not be influenced in any manner to tender apology in a particular mode or manner---Statue expressly provides that, in case of contempt, truth is a valid defence. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 145 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case State VS IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI Ss. 3 & 5---Contempt proceedings---Benefit of doubt, extention of---Principle---Extending benefit of doubt has to be treated as embedded in proceedings relating to contempt---Benefit cannot be denied to alleged contemnor---Principle of extending benefit of doubt forms an integral part of contempt proceedings. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 145 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case State VS IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI Ss. 3 & 5---Contempt proceedings---apology, tendering of---Explaining context of actions---Scope---Mere fact that alleged contemnor seeks to explain context of actions that has attracted contempt proceedings is not a basis to conclude that apology accompanying such explanation and defence must be rejected for lacking bona fides---While provision of S. 5(2) of Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003, provides that an apology may be tendered at any stage---apology tendered at fag end of judicial proceedings in a contempt matter, where prospect of conviction has crystallized would be deemed to be an afterthought and not an expression of sincere and genuine remorse---To impose a requirement of furnishing unconditional apology or an apology without any explanation or justification would not sit well within the explicit text of S. 5(2) of Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 and explanation provided therein. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 145 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case State VS IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI S. 3---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 204---Contempt of Court---Public speech---Scope---Law of contempt backed by Art. 204 of the Constitution and provisions of Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003, reflect that the Legislature has determined in its wisdom that speech, unless in temperate language and unless its content does not impute illegal motives to a Judge and does not impugn integrity and impartiality of the Judge would amount to contempt of court. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 145 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case State VS IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI S.3---Contempt of Court---Criminal and judicial contempt---Scope---Determination of requisite intent in relation to criminal or judicial contempt is to be undertaken on an objective basis---Alleged contemnor may claim that his actions were not backed by mens rea, or intent to commit contempt, or may even be willing to lead evidence in support of his actual intent at relevant time---Test applicable for purposes of constructing intent is not subjective but is objective---Raison d'etre of contempt law is not to punish but to determine conduct that interferes with or obstruct justice---Contempt of Court is not a strict liability offence---In determining mens rea on an objective basis, it is the effect that law focuses on and not the subjective intent of contemnor---Even where objectional conduct is deleterious to authority of Court, unless the effect is quantified and found capable of causing substantial detriment to administration of justice, the offending act does not attract conviction and punishment---Conduct found capable of interfering with and becoming a substantial detriment to administration of justice also keeps evolving with time. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 145 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case State VS IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI Ss.3 & 5---Contempt proceedings---apology, tendering of---Effect---Contempt is essentially between Court and contemnor---Taking action against contemnor or accepting an apology is entirely a matter between alleged contemnor and Court and subject to the latter's satisfaction. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 145 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case State VS IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI S. 3---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Arts. 117 & 120---Contempt proceedings---Onus to prove---In contempt proceedings matter of placing onus is totally different from a case under criminal law, which presumes innocence of accused and places burden on prosecution to establish charge against latter beyond a reasonable doubt---Onus is entirely upon person charged, to prove his innocence. Citation Name: 2023 PLD 145 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case State VS IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI Ss. 3 & 5---Contempt proceedings---apology, tendering of---Benefit of doubt, extending of---Principle---Non-framing of charge---Effect---Respondent/contemnor was a politician who during a public speech passed derogatory remarks against a Judge conducting a criminal trial---High Court issued contempt notice to respondent/contemnor who tendered his apology to the words used by him during public speech---Validity--- Citation Name: 2023 PLD 145 ISLAMABADBookmark this Case State VS IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI Ss. 3 & 5---Contempt proceedings---Benefit of doubt---Principle of---applicability---

State vs IMRAN AHMAD KHAN NIAZI Ss — 2023 PLD 145 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PLD