' M. TABASSUM AFTAB ALVI, J.---The supra titled proceedings were initiated against alleged contemnor-respondent under section 51 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Legal Practitioners and Bar Council Act, 1995, with another separate show cause in accordance with provisions of sections 3 and 7 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1993.
2. The precise facts culminating into initiating of the instant proceedings are that Ch. Muhammad Younas Arvi, a senior Advocate, Supreme Court practicing at Mirpur, sent a copy of letter to the honourble Chief Justice of High Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir by registered mail on 20-5- 2013. Through the aforesaid letter certain allegations were levelled against Hon'ble Chief Justice of Azad Jammu and Kashmir, a learned Judge of the High Court and two learned Judges of the Shariat Court, including District and Sessions Judge Mirpur. The aforesaid letter was placed in a meeting of Judges Council and after examining gravity of the letter, it was decided to proceed against .The alleged contemnor for cancellation of his license as well as to initiate contempt proceedings against him. On the basis of aforesaid decision, Full Bench was constituted by the Hon'ble Chief Justice to proceed against respondent, hence, a show-cause notice was issued against the alleged contemnor as to why his license may not be suspended with a separate show- cause notice as to why contempt of Court proceedings may also not be initiated against him, in view of his wilful and deliberate attempt to lower down the prestige and authority of superior Judiciary of the State, vide order dated 28-5-2013. The respondent on the basis of the aforesaid show-cause notices appeared before the Court with a written explanation accompanied by several documents who instead of showing repentance, reiterated allegations used in his letter.
After hearing the alleged contemnor in support of his letter and written explanation, he was prima facie found guilty to scandalize the superior Judiciary which intended to bring the authority of the Courts and administration of law into disrepute, hence, his license of advocacy was suspended in terms of provisions of section 51 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Legal Practitioners and Bar Council Act, 1995 and separate contempt proceedings were also initiated under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1993, vide order dated 4-6-2013. In view of the aforesaid order a complaint was also made to the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Bar Council, for initiating legal proceedings against the alleged contemnor on 8-7-2013. However, charge was yet not framed, when an application was moved by respondent for withdrawal of the letter. After the aforesaid application at various dates the Bench was not complete and the alleged contemnor also time and again absented, hence, no order could be passed upon the said application. The case was, however, fixed for framing charge on 24-6-2014, when respondent tendered unconditional apology and in this regard his statement was also recorded. As Court was likely to be closed for summer vacations and due to retirement of our learned brother Mr. Justice Abdul Rasheed Sulehria, Bench was otherwise busy, therefore, order pertaining to acceptance or otherwise of unconditional apology of respondent was reserved vide order dated 24-6-2014.
3. Before announcement of order again a letter dated 10-7-2014, signed by the alleged contemnor along with a notice addressed to certain members of Bar Association, Mirpur, for calling meeting was received by the Hon'ble Chief Justice through registered mail. The aforesaid letter was sent to the Bench seized with the matter. Keeping in view the emergent nature of the matter the Bench resumed on 5-8-2014 and after examining contents of letter found it contemptuous hence, another show cause notice was issued to the alleged contemnor vide order dated 5-8-2014. It was also noticed that in meeting few members of Bar Association, Mirpur, had shown great concern on the issue of revival of advocacy license of respondent and certain processions had been reported in print media therefore, Registrar of this Court was directed to provide all the relevant papers before the Court with further direction to collect report pertaining to processions from District and Sessions Judge, Mirpur, as well as from S.S.P. Mirpur vide order dated 5-8-2014. The report, has been filed in this regard by Registrar of the Court.
4. The accused-respondent again appeared and preferred written application who solicited unconditional apology about his subsequent conduct as well and expressed regret on his act.
Another application has also been moved by President District Bar Association, Mirpur, duly signed by Senior Vice President and General Secretary of the Bar. The President and other representatives of District Bar, Mirpur, solicited unconditional apology on behalf of alleged contemnor and also gave us assurance that he will not repeat such-like offence in future.
5. The legal profession is known as a noble profession having high traditions and has been catering to the need of the society for a very long time past. Thus, the members of legal fraternity are expected to uphold those traditions and serve the society with utmost respect to Courts, sincerity and honestly. If such are the expectations from a noble profession, its members must conduct themselves which may be worthy of emulation. By doing any act which is contrary to the accepted norms and standards of the aforesaid professions, a member of the legal fraternity not only discredits himself but also brings disrepute to the profession to which he belongs. By such acts the credibility and reputation of the profession as a whole comes under cloud. If any member of the profession falls from such standards, he deserves punishment commensurate with the gravity of misconduct.
6. However, as respondent has solicited time and again unqualified and unconditional apology who has thrown himself upon the mercy of the Court and has not tried to justify the contents of the letters. The subsequent application for seeking unqualified apology is endorsed by President, Senior Vice-President and General Secretary of District Bar Association, Mirpur. The aforesaid representatives of Bar also guaranteed that respondent will not repeat the alleged offence in future. The conduct of respondent was seriously condemned by the representatives of the said Bar Association. The apology has been tendered at the earlier opportunity before framing charge and the Court in such like cases has always shown leniency and grace in accepting, such apologies tendered by contemnors. It is true that submission of apology cannot wipe off gravity of contempt, however, the act of tendering unconditional apology is always important and considered sympathetically. The apex Court of Pakistan in identical facts exonerated a senior Advocate by accepting his unconditional and unqualified apology in case titled Federation of Pakistan v. Yusuf All Khan PLD 1977 SC 276. The ratio decidendi of the precedent case is reproduced as follows:-- "At the hearing of this matter, the respondent has further clarified his desire to unconditionally withdraw the .Offending remarks and has reiterated his regard for the superior Courts of the country.
' We accept the unconditional apology tendered by the respondent and discharge the notice."
' The alleged contemnor Yusuf Ali Khan Bar-at-Law, in the cited case, addressed a letter to the President of Pakistan, in which he had made certain disparaging remarks against former Chief Justice of Pakistan. The contempt proceedings were initiated against the respondent who solicited unconditional apology which was accepted by the Full Bench the apex Court of Pakistan.
' Similarly in [(1998) 8 SCC 660], the Supreme Court of India, initiated contempt of Court proceedings against Shri Bal Thackeray, Advocate, under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. However, the learned Advocate tendered unconditional apology and expressed regret for his act, which was accepted and in this regard ratio of the Court is reproduced as follows:-- "1 . We have perused the affidavits filed by Shri Bal Thackeray including his last affidavit dated 26- 10-1995 which was filed by him in accordance with the direction given by us in the order dated 17- 10-1995. Shri Bal Thackeray has tendered unconditional apology and expressed regret for his act which led to the initiation of this proceeding. In his affidavit, in addition to expressing his sincere regret and unconditional apology, he has also indicated that he has realized his mistake and he did not intend to cast even the remotest aspersion on any member of this Court. Mr. Ram Jethmalani, learned counsel for Shri Bal Thackeray, also gives us assurance to this effect on his behalf. We are satisfied that the unconditional apology which has been tendered and the regret expressed are genuine. We, therefore, accept the same and discharge the notices to all the respondents."
' The same like manner the High Court of Patna in AIR 1963 Patna 233, accepted apology of an Advocate by warning to be careful in future. At page 235 of the report it was opined as under:--- "But all the same, the question of any mala fida intention on his part does not arise. The advocate in his show cause petition not only expressed regret but also he has promised to be more careful in further, so that a mistake like this may not recur. In our opinion, therefore, without scrutinizing the statements of Ramadhar and Janak Kumar respectively, which would not lead to anything particularly material, it is sufficient for us to say that in the absence of any improper motive or intention on the part of the advocate opposite party, he cannot be held guilty of any improper conduct, except that he should have been more careful than he was as the facts and circumstances of this cast disclose. Accordingly, we accept the apology tendered by him and his promise of more careful acting on his part in future, and accept the recommendation of the tribunal that it is not a fit case to start a proceeding against Sri Ram Chandra Prasad Sinha."
7. The nub of above discussion is that; the unqualified apology tendered by respondent is accepted and order of suspension of his license along with contempt notice dated 4-6-2013, are discharged. However, we are inclined to observe that respondent would admonish him to be careful about dignity of Courts, act prudently in future and will not indulge in acts of an unbecoming officer of the Court, otherwise law will take its own course. As we have accepted unconditional apology of the alleged contemnor, hence, unqualified apology of President and other representatives of District Bar Association, Mirpur, relating to few members of Mirpur Bar, who participated in unlawful processions, is also accepted subject to all just exceptions. An attested copy of the instant order shall be transmitted to Secretary Bar Council for placing the same before the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Bar Council, for disposal of the complaint against respondent, sent by this Court on 8-7-2013. These are detailed reasons of our short order dated 2-9-2014.