Acting IHC CJ halts contempt action against court official

ISLAMABAD: A division bench of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday stopped contempt proceedings initiated against the deputy registrar judicial by a single-member bench for transferring a petition of Mashal Yousafzai who had sought a meeting with Imran Khan.

The division bench, comprising acting Chief Justice Sardar Mohammad Sarfraz Dogar and Justice Mohammad Asif, stayed the suo motu proceedings initiated by Justice Sardar Ejaz Ishaq Khan against the deputy registrar and others.

The registrar office had consolidated all the 26 petitions and auxiliary applications related to ex-PM’s jail matters on the request of Adiala Jail’s Senior Superintendent Abdul Ghafoor Anjum.

Mr Anjum had sought consolidation before a large bench citing administrative problems for appearing before various benches on identical issues related to Mr Khan’s jail life.

Judge initiated proceedings after Imran-related case transferred sans his consent

Justice Ishaq Khan had raised serious questions over the legality of the transfer of a contempt petition from a sitting judge without his consent and initiated the contempt proceedings against the court’s officials.

It may be mentioned that an IHC larger bench earlier this year had scrapped the contempt proceedings against the registrar and deputy registrar, security, initiated by Justice Babar Sattar observing that the show cause notice under the contempt law could not be issued to an official who is subject to disciplinary proceeding in the high court.

Deputy Registrar Judicial Sultan Mehmood in his appeal cited the same judgement, through his counsel Barrister Qasim Ali Chohan.

The appeal states that the controversy arose during the hearing of Criminal Original Petition No. 9 of 2025, titled Mashal Azam vs. Gafoor Anjum, etc“.

The case was originally scheduled before a single judge-in-chambers on March 19, but prior to that the acting chief justice ordered the consolidation of all pending visitation-related cases before a larger bench.

The appellant argued that he was merely following directives from the CJ’s office when the matter was reassigned.

The single judge-in-chambers, however, questioned the legal authority of transferring a contempt petition from his court without his consent. The judge subsequently issued orders requiring the deputy registrar to provide documentation justifying the transfer and to explain the legal basis for such administrative actions.

In his appeal, Mr Mehmood has contended that the contempt proceedings are unwarranted and lack substantial justification. He maintains that his actions were purely administrative and in compliance with orders from the CJ’s office.

The appellant further argued that any concerns about procedural irregularities should have been referred to the Administration Committee or the Chief Justice rather than resulting in contempt proceedings.

In his order, which surfaced on Thursday following the March 20 hearing, Justice Ishaq Khan expressed concerns over the procedural aspects of the case transfer, stating that the order appeared contradictory. He pointed out that while the petitioner’s counsel did not press for the transfer of visitation cases, the subsequent consolidation of cases inherently resulted in a transfer.

The court also noted that initial application for transfer was moved under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), which, as conceded by the advocate general, was inapplicable since a bench of a high court is not a subordinate court.

Published in Dawn, March 28th, 2025