Through the instant Criminal Original Petition, the Petitioner (Syed Shah Abbas) has alleged violation of Order dated 22.04.2021 passed by this Court in W.P. No.117/2021 and seeks initiation of contempt proceedings against the Respondents.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the Respondent filed Writ Petition No.117/2021 against the Petitioner before this Court, challenging the Order dated 10.12.2020 which was passed by the Collector (Adjudication) holding as follows: "From the above discussion it is concluded that the impugned vehicle is not smuggled, as being lawfully imported under diplomatic immunity . However , the impugned vehicle was not disposed of as envisaged under Notification (SRO)566(I)/2006 dated 05.06.2006 as amended vide SRO 239(I)/2013 dated 22.03.2013. Therefore, the vehicle is allowed to be released to the respo ndent on payment of leviable duty / taxes, as envisaged under SRO 577(I)/2006 dated 05.06.2006. The Embassy of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordo n falls under category-II of SRO 577(I)/2006 dated 05.06.2006, therefore, 45% of duty and taxes shall be leviable at the prevailing rates of exchange, and duty/taxes on value determined in foreign currency at the time of importation."
3. The said writ petition was dismissed vide Order dated 22.04.2021. It was held that there is no denying the fact that the Customs authorities had confirmed that the vehicle in question ("Subject Vehicle ") was imported by the Embassy of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordon. Since the Subject Vehicle had been imported by the Embassy of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordon, it cannot be held to be a smuggled vehicle. In view thereof, it was held as follows: "Now that it has been held that the vehicle in question had been imported by the said Embassy , I do not find any legal infirmity in the order passed by the Collector (Adjudication) to allow the release of the vehicle on payment of the duties and taxes in accordance with notification (SRO)577(I)2006 dated 05.06.2006. The Customs authorities ought to accept the payment of the duties and taxes in accordance with the said Notification and ought not be frustrate the order passed by the Collector (Adjudication) by not accepting the payment of applicable duties and taxes by respondent No.1.
7. In view of the above the instant petition is dismissed. Nothing mentioned herein above shall operate to the petitioner 's prejudice during the hearing of its appeal before the C.A.T ."
4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner , inter alia, contends that vide Order dated 22.04.2021 passed by this Court in W.P. No.117/2021, clear direction to the Respondent was issued that challan be issued to the Petitioner and the Customs authority ought to accept the payment of the duties and taxes in accordance with the notification and ought not to frustrate the order dated 10.12.2020; that the Petitioner personally visited the offices of the Respondent many times and also submitted an application dated 28.04.2020 to the Respondent for the issuance of challan but they deliberately ignored the direction of this Court and lingered on the matter; that the Respondent not only humiliated the Petitioner but also refused to obey the directions of this Court without any legal and lawful reasons; and that the act of the Respondent is highly unlawful, illegal, contemptuous, and against the fundamental rights of the Petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the Respondent submitted that the Respondent has already filed appeal along with stay application against the Order dated 10.12.2020 passed by the Collector (Adjudication) before learned Customs Appellate Tribunal ("C.A.T.") which is still pending adjudication wherein the learned C.A.T. admitted the appeal and granted status quo and restrained the Respondent from delivering the Subject Vehicle vide Order dated 16.12.2021. As C.A.T. has now become functional and the appeal is fixed for regular hearing, therefore, the Respondent has not committed any contempt of Court. Learned counsel further submitted that on 14.02.2022 the appeal was fixed before the C.A.T. but the Petitioner had not appeared, it seems that the Petitioner is not interested to pursue the matter before the Customs Appellate Tribunal. Learned counsel for the Respondent prayed for the dismissal of the instant petition on account of having become infructuous with the direction to the Petitioner to avail remedy before the C.A.T Islamabad. Learned counsel for the Respondent relied upon unreported cases titled as The Assistant Collector Customs Vs. Muhammad Farhan, C.P. No.544/2021, The Assistant Collector Customs (Preventive Division), Islamabad Vs. Sher Muhammad, W.P. No.3767/2020 and Syed Mukaram Saeed Vs. The Assistant Collector Customs, W.P. No.544/2021.
6. Arguments heard. Record perused.
7. It is noted that along with the report filed by the Respondent, a copy of the Memo of Petition filed in W.P.
No.117/2021 before this Court has been submitted. The prayer in such writ petition is reproduced herein below: "It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that Customs Order-in-Reman No.403/2020 dated 10.12.2020, passed by Respondent No.3 Collector (Adjudication) Islamabad, may kindly be suspended till then Custom Appellate Tribunal, Islamabad may not be functional in the interest of justice."
8. Perusal of the said prayer clause make s it abundantly clear that the Respondent only sought suspension of the Customs Order-in-Remand No.403 of 2020 dated 10.12.2020 passed by the Collector of Customs (Adjudication)
Islamabad till such time that C.A.T . Islamabad became functional. Vide the Order dated 22.04.2021, Writ Petition No.117/2021 was dismissed which, therefore, means that the Customs Order-in -Remand No.403 of 2020 was not suspended by this Court. It was further clarified that the Customs authorities should not frustrate the said order .
Although the Respondent filed a Civil Petition before the Honourable Supreme Court challenging the said order but it was subsequently withdrawn. In such circumstances the Respondent was required to comply with the Customs Order-in -Remand No.403 of 2020 in accordance with the Order dated 22.04.2021 passed by this Court in W.P.
No.117/2021.
9. The Respondent has relied upon para 7 of the Order dated 22.04.2021 passed in W.P. No.117/2021 by this Court, whereby it has been stated that nothing in such order shall operate to the petitioner 's prejudice during the hearing of the appeal before C.A.T . Respondent' s reliance on such part of the said order does not explain their non-compliance with the clear instructions to not frustrate the Customs Order-in-Remand from the time that they withdrew the C.P. from the Honourable Supreme Court till C.A.T . became functional and passed the status quo order .
10. Indeed it was the Respondent who invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court against the Petitioner and in case order had been passed in their favor , surely they would have sought strict implementation of the same against the Petitioner . But since the result was not to their liking, they dragged their feet in its implementation.
11. Having said that in the instant case, the learned counsel for the Petitioner state d that the Petitioner is prepared to pursue his case before C.A.T ., and he is not seeking recovery of the Subject Vehicle from this Court. In so far as contempt proceedings are concerned, matter is always between the Court and the contemnor and the Court resorts to contempt proceedings sparingly . Since, the Order dated 22.04.2021 passed in W.P. No. 117/2021 was in the nature of providing interim relief till C.A.T . became functional and clearly stated that its findings would not prejudice the respondent taken together with the fact that now C.A.T ., has become functional and proceedings are underway , I see no reason for instituting contempt proceedings at this point in time.
12. In view of the above, the instant petition is disposed of as having become infructuous.