Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: FAROOQ AHMAD VS Respondent: Mian SHAHID MAHMOODHonorable Justice CH. IJAZ AHMADMian Mahmood Rashid,Sardar Ahmed Jamal Sukhera
2003 M L D 1400
2003 M L D 1400
[Lahore]
Before Ch. Ijaz Ahmad and Mian Saqib Nisar, JJ
FAROOQ AHMAD---Petitioner
Versus
Mian SHAHID MAHMOOD----Respondent
Criminal, Original No.686-W of 2000, decided on 27th September, 2001.
Contempt of Court----
---- Contempt proceedings---Notice---Concerned parties---Contempt was always between contemner and the Court.
Mian Mahmood Rashid for Petitioner.
Sardar Ahmed Jamal Sukhera for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 27th September, 2001.
ORDER
CH. IJAZ AHMAD, J.----Respondent was directed to decide the representation of the appellant vide order dated 3-5-2000. Respondent decided the representation of the petitioner vide order dated 16-5-2001. Appellant being aggrieved, filed this contempt application.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent committed contempt of this Court, as designated authority had not decided the representation of the petitioner. He further submits that the designated authority did not provide personal hearing to the petitioner, therefore, respondent committed contempt of this Court.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that respondent had decided the representation of the petitioner, as directed by this Court, vide order dated 16-5-2000. He further submits that respondent did not commit the contempt of this Court.
4. We have considered the contention of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. Since the representation of the petitioner was decided by the respondent on 16-5-2001. After perusing the reply, we do not incline to issue notice to the respondent. It is settled principle of law that the contempt is always between the contemner and the Court.
This petition is dismissed.
H.B.T./F-176/L Petition dismissed.