The Islamabad High Court’s larger bench has declared contempt of court proceedings against the Registrar and Deputy Registrar of the High Court null and void and ruled that judges cannot initiate contempt of court proceedings against judicial officers, however, departmental proceedings can be initiated.
A larger bench comprising Chief Justice Aamir Farooq, Justice Muhammad Azam Khan and Justice Inam Amin Minhas delivered the verdict on an appeal against the indictment in a contempt of court case filed by Registrar Sardar Tahir Sabir and Deputy Registrar Muhammad Owaisul Hassan Khan.
The larger bench ruled that where disciplinary action can be initiated against employees, it is more appropriate to initiate similar proceedings instead of contempt of court proceedings.
Justice Sattar had initiated contempt of court proceedings against the officers of the Islamabad High Court on May 9 last year for failing to maintain law and order during the lawyers’ strike.
The contempt proceedings were initiated on a complaint by lawyer Naeem Bukhari, in which he accused the president of the Islamabad High Court Bar Association (IHCBA) of forcibly preventing lawyers from entering the premises.
However, in subsequent hearings, the contempt proceedings were directed to the registrar and deputy registrar, as they had allegedly misled the court, with both officers challenging the contempt proceedings through intra-court appeals.
During the hearing, the counsel for the petitioners argued before the bench that no contempt of court is committed in the facts and circumstances, as there is no bar to the legal community approaching this court.
The petition argued that both the petitioners are employees of the Islamabad High Court, and if there was dereliction of duty, the matter should have been reported to the Chief Justice, and it should have been placed before the Administration Committee, but there is no need to initiate contempt proceedings.
The court said that ‘no misrepresentation was made and the appellants could not even think about it, therefore the question of perjury or explanation does not arise’.
The lawyer said that if there is dereliction of duty, the appropriate course of action is to take disciplinary action instead of initiating contempt of court.
The bench said that orders passed in contempt of court proceedings are appealable, the appeal will be as a right, where an order or decision has been issued using the punishment of contempt of court.
The judgment said that the Administrative Committee of the Islamabad High Court, after receiving the inquiry report, came to the conclusion that there is no obstacle in this regard, nor is there any complaint, therefore there is no obstruction in the delivery of justice.
If any esteemed judge of this court feels that any of the appellants is neglecting his duties, the appropriate course of action was to refer the matter to the Administrative Committee of this court or the Chief Justice.
According to the judgment, the initiation of contempt proceedings, where there was no administrative or judicial order, cannot form the basis of proceedings against the appellants.
The judgment said that if such proceedings are taken, where the judges issue a contempt notice to the High Court establishment, where there is no violation of the order, it will hinder the free and smooth functioning of the institution.
A dereliction of duty can be committed by an employee and the appropriate forum is to file a written complaint with the competent authority for initiating disciplinary proceedings.
The court held that since the Registrar and Deputy Registrar had not committed any negligence in upholding the order of May 9 last year, no contempt proceedings shall be initiated, and declared the contempt proceedings null and void.
It should be noted that recently a Supreme Court bench initiated contempt of court proceedings against Additional Registrar Nazar Abbas, while Lahore High Court Registrar Abhir Gul Khan also faced contempt of court proceedings over an administrative matter.
