Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: 2025 IHC 50
Court / Jurisdiction: Islamabad High Court
Year of Decision: 2025
Decision Date: 2025-01-27
Parties: Arbab Imam Dino Samoon vs Tahir Yaqoob Bhatti, etc
Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Islamabad High Court on 2025-01-27, officially reported as 2025 IHC 50. In this matter between Arbab Imam Dino Samoon and Tahir Yaqoob Bhatti, etc, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.
Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.
Case cited as 2025IHC50
Court Name: Islamabad High Court Judge(s): Inaam Ameen Minhas Title: Arbab Imam Dino Samoon vs Tahir Yaqoob Bhatti, etc Case No.: I.C.A No.21 of 2025 Date of Judgment:2025-01-27 Reported As: 2025 IHC 50 Result: Appeal Dismissed
Judgment
ORDER INAAM AMEEN MINHAS, J.- Through the instant Intra Court Appeal, the appellant has challenged the order dated 02.12.2024 passed in Criminal Original No.217/2024. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the appellant was not provided copy of the comments filed by respondent No.1 as such the appellant was condemned unheard. Learned counsel further contended that respondent No.1 provided incomplete information to learned Single Judge in Chambers and succeeded in obtaining the order in his favour. It was next contended that learned Single Judge in Chambers failed to appreciate the documents annexed with the contempt petition and the impugned order has been passed in slipshod manner. 3. We have heard the learned counsel and perused the record. 4. Perusal of the impugned order reveals that in paragraph 4 of the same, learned Single Judge in Chambers has properly appreciated the facts, which is reproduced as under:- The respondents have brought documents to show that on 03.06.2024 (i.e. prior to the filing of the instant contempt petition), the petitioner had applied for leave from 04.06.2024 to 18.06.2024. Since he remained absent from duty with effect from 27.06.2024 without any intimation, he was called upon vide OM dated 23.08.2024 to explain his position within two days. Vide Office Memoranda dated 03.09.2024 and 11.09.2024, he was again asked to explain why he had remained absent from duty without prior intimation failing which disciplinary proceedings would be initiated against him. Again vide letter dated 18.09.2024, he was called upon to rejoin his duty. There is no
---
## Page 2
complaint on the record from the petitioner that he had been preventing by the respondents from joining his duty at Karachi. 5. Learned Single Judge in Chambers has minutely dealt with each and every factual and legal question raised by the appellant in his contempt petition and found no violation of order dated 10.05.2024 passed in writ petition No.1499/2024. The impugned order is well reasoned and needs no interference. 6. In view of the above, the instant I.C.A is dismissed in limine being devoid of merit.