' GHULAM RABBANI, J.---The above titled Human Rights Case was registered on the petition of Dr, Babar Awan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, wherein he has made the following prayer:-- "This court is requested to constitute a Judicial Commission of its own to examine the records and witnesses in order to enforce and protect the rights of the petitioner under Articles 4 and Article 9 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973."
2. In his petition which is addressed to Humble Chief Justice of Pakistan, the petitioner has mainly stated that he is one of the senior office bearers of Pakistan People Party and member of its Central Executive Committee; that he served the nation as Federal Minister for Parliamentary Affairs, Federal Minister for Law and Justice and Federal Minister for Information Technology and Telecom; that in his capacity as Member of the Central Executive Committee it is his duty further to execute and implement the policies of his party; that on 10-6-2011, Rana Sanaullah, who is Provincial Law Minister and the Spokesman of the Government of Punjab and claims himself to be the most influential person dealing with law and order, had declared the petitioner "liable to be murdered" in his address to and in front of media outside the Provincial Assembly building of Punjab at Lahore, which fact came to his knowledge next day in a question and answer talk with media; that such public announcement by the Provincial Minister amounts to passing of an extra-judicial death sentence against the petitioner; that now the petitioner has learnt through former Federal Minister and a prominent leader and Sardar from the Province of Baluchistan that some outlaws were contacted by govt. Officials on behalf of Executive of the Punjab through some gangsters, and taken to Multan and asked to launch a murderous attack on the petitioner between Gujranwala and Lahore; that-in that the outlaws were given photograph of petitioner and offered assistance of police and complete security cover to accomplish the task and flee away 4which fact they later disclosed to the said Sardar of Baluchistan; that Shahbaz Sharif Government in Punjab is desperate to arrest the petitioner on false charge or pretext and then facilitate such an attack on the life of the petitioner, hence there is eminent danger and threat to the life of petitioner.
3. Beside above, the petitioner has, in his petition, referred to a unanimous resolution of upper house of Parliament showing deep concern over the life of petitioner being put in jeopardy by the Minister of the Punjab. Petitioner has also referred to the findings of a Judicial Commission comprising of Mr. Justice Qazi Faez Isa, Chairman/Chief Justice of Baluchistan High Court, Mr. Justice Iqbal Hameed-urRehman, Member/present Chief Justice of Islamabad High Court and Mr. Justice Imtiaz Ali, Member/Judge of the Peshawar High Court, which probed into the so-called assassination plot of the former Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court, which according to petitioner, was staged by the Punjab Government alleging that the petitioner was part of conspiracy of the assassination. Petitioner has stated that the aforementioned Commission concluded that it was a false drama. Petitioner has alleged that in the above stated circumstances there is immense danger and threat to his life and has made the above-noted prayer.
4. The above matter was put up before Mr. Justice Javed iqbal under the order of Hon'ble Chief Justice of Pakistan who passed order on 4-7-2011 that "Let at first instance Rana Sanaullah, former Minister of Punjab, Lahore, appear in my chambers on 7-7-2011 at 1-30 p.m.",. however on that date hearing was adjourned to 18-7-2011 for want of service. Since my respectable brother was to retire and was not available for court work after 15-7-2011 the matter was ordered to be fixed before me on the adjourned date. Subsequently on being served, concise statement signed by Rana Sanaullah has been filed by Mr. M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record wherein it is stated that the allegation that on 10-6-2011 he addressed media and declared the petitioner "liable to murdered" is not correct; that the opposition Members in the Provincial Assembly too had misconstrued/misinterpreted his statement of 10-6-2011 and protested during Assembly Session hold on 15-6-2011 but when the matter was clarified by him, the Leader of Opposition (Raja Riaz Ahmad) accepted the clarification in unequivocal terms stating that "after the clarification which the Law Minister has made from his side, I believe that there is no need to say anything further in this matter"; that even the Speaker of Assembly commended the settlement of this issue and thanked both the sides; that as regards resolution passed by the Senate it is averred that he had, in his talk with media, stated in categorical terms that "I pray for the life of Babar Awan" and that "I have not extended any threat of murder to any one"; that he reiterates the clarificatory statement in the instant reply as well. The statement of the petitioner that the Executive of Punjab through some gangsters contacted some outlaws to launch murderous assault between Gujranwala and Lahore and other statements in Para Nos.6 and 7 of petition have also been emphatically denied with explanation that "these are represented to be based on information stated to have been provided by a former Federal Minister from the Province of Balochistan, namely Sardar Baz Muhammad Khan Khetran, the contents of the copy of the affidavit of Mr. Khetran, which has been placed on record by the petitioner's counsel, do not support the specific allegations made by the petitioner inter alia, vis-a-vis involvement of any "executive of the Punjab" or any 'government Official" thereof. Thus the said affidavit neither supports the averments of the petitioner that the so-called outlaws were contacted "on behalf of executive of Punjab" or "by the government Official ", nor does this affidavit support the further averments of the petitioner to the effect that the said outlaws were "offered to have the assistance of the police and complete security cover to accomplish the task and then to flee away." It is also denied that Punjab Government staged any drama as alleged in the petition and in this connection it is stated that the Judicial Commission has not given any such finding whatsoever that the report prepared by Col. Rehman regarding assassination plot of the then Chief Justice Lahore High Court was "a' drama staged by the Provincial Government or was prepared at its behest", so also the allegation ' that Shahbaz Shard's Government in Punjab was desperate to arrest the petitioner has been controverted by saying that it is absolutely false and politically motivated. It is stated in categorical terms that there was no question of petitioner's fundamental right of life being in serious jeopardy as alleged. Lastly, it is prayed that this application be, dismissed.
5. On 24-8-2011 when this matter came up for hearing, Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Chaudhry learned Advocate Supreme Court requested for some time to go through the concise statement which he had received and to furnish rejoinder, if any, on the next date of hearing. No rejoinder has yet been filed. On 6-10-2011 again when this matter was taken up Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Chaudhry, learned Advocate Supreme Court requested for some time to consult the applicant and come prepared after going through the record and the matter was adjourned for 10-10-2011. However, in the meantime Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Chaudhry, learned Advocate Supreme Court submitted an application stating that Dr. Babar Awan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court, applicant wanted to appear personally and argue the case and the hearing be adjourned from 10-10-2011 to some other date as the applicant had pre-engagement with District Bar Association Chakwal. This request was acceded to and the hearing was adjourned to 12-10-2011 at 11-30 a.m. The matter was taken up, accordingly, but, respectfully stated none appeared on behalf of the applicant at the call, the matter was kept aside to be taken after an hour. This was done, as is evident, to provide appropriate opportunity of hearing in all fairness. However, on second call too, no one appeared on behalf of the applicant. Even then, having waited for some time another call was given at 1-03 p.m. But this time (third time) again none appeared on behalf of the applicant. The Additional Advocate General Punjab and Mr. M.S. Khattak remained present all along. Office, too, had confirmed service and in support placed on record the notice with endorsement of service on Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court, for date of hearing of that day. The hearing was, again adjourned to 14-10-2011 at 11-30 a.m. In the interest of justice. It shall be pertinent to observe at this point that on that day when matter had already been adjourned as noted, Mr.. Muhammad Ramzan Chaudhry, learned Advocate Supreme Court appeared at 2-02 p.m., regretted his absence stating that he got engaged in some case before the Court, therefore, he could not appear at the time of calls. He was, however, informed about the adjourned date of hearing. Today, when the matter was taken up in Chambers as usual, at the time of call Mr. Shoaib Shaheen, learned DAG submitted an application for adjournment contents whereof are reproduced as follows:- "(I) That the above referred application is pending adjudication before this Hon'ble Commission and the same is fixed for today i,e, 14-10-2011.
(2) That the counsel for the applicant namely Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Chaudhary, Advocate Supreme Court, being a key supporter of Mr. Muhammad Yaseen Azad, a candidate for the post of President, Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) is busy in his election campaign and is visiting different stations to launch his campaign effectively and, therefore, cannot appear before this august Commission, before the elections of SCBA which are scheduled to be held on 29-10-2011.
' Under the circumstances, it is most respectfully prayed that the proceedings in the above referred application may kindly be adjourned after SCBA's elections i,e, 29-10-2011.
' He also placed on behalf of the petitioner another application with a prayer that the petitioner be allowed to adduce evidence. Learned Additional Advocate General, who was present resisted the application. He stated that Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Chaudhry, learned Advocate Supreme Court was already available in some case before the Bench headed by Humble Chief Justice of Pakistan and that the application for adjournment was made to, unnecessary, prolong the proceedings.
Even then, Mr. Muhammad Shoaib Shaheen, learned DAG was directed to ask the learned counsel for petitioner to make his attendance possible and proceed with the matter or in the alternate he could proceed with the matter when with instructions authorized as per law, by the petitioner. He, accordingly, requested for some time to seek instruction in this behalf. In the meantime on directions the concerned Court Associate confirmed that Mr. Muhammad Ramzan Chaudhry, learned Advocate Supreme Court was present in the Court before Bench headed by humble Chief Justice and that he appeared on behalf of CDA in case SMC No,5 of 2011 (listed at Sr. No,1 of Supplementary Cause List), whereas the other case viz. C.P. 176 of 2011 (Hub Power Company Ltd. v.
Federation through Secretary) in which he kept waiting, was discharged. On the other hand Mr. Muhammad Shoaib Shaheen, learned DAG appeared at 12-50 p.m. After more than half an hour and stated that he could not get instructions. Learned Additional Advocate-General Punjab has insisted to advance his arguments. In the circumstances I have no option but to proceed with the matter. The request for adjournment is declined.
6. Learned Additional Advocate-General Punjab has submitted that the allegations as made by the petitioner are incorrect, the Provincial Law Minister Rana Sanaullah had even denied the allegations on the floor of the Assembly and had clarified his position which was accepted by the Leader of the Opposition. Learned Additional Advocate-General has, then, in his arguments, virtually repeated, almost the same averments as find mention in the concise statement of Rana Sanaullah. In addition, he has submitted with emphasis and in clear terms that there is no danger to the life or liberty of the petitioner from the Provincial Law Minister of the Punjab or from the side of the Government of the Punjab; that the petitioner will have full protection from the Government of Punjab; that even then 'if Mr. Babar Awan, petitioner, has any grievance he can approach the appropriate authority at any time. Lastly, he has submitted that this petition is not maintainable as a Human Rights case and may be disposed of accordingly.
7. I have given due attention to the arguments of learned Additional A.-G. Punjab more particularly where he has stated in categorical terms that there is no danger to the life and liberty of the petitioner from Rana Sanaullah or Government of the Punjab and that the petitioner will have full protection, which even otherwise is fundamental right of a citizen in accordance with provisions of Constitution. Thus, in my view, on going through the petition of Dr. Babar Awan, the reply furnished by Rana Sanaullah to which no rejoinder has been filed and after hearing learned Additional Advocate-General Punjab there appears to be no convincing reason to proceed further on this petition. This petition is, therefore disposed of accordingly with this observation that in case Dr. Babar Awan, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court feels aggrieved, he may approach the concerned Authority.
Applicant for adducing evidence.
' In view of what is stated hereinabove, this application also stands disposed of.