' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---In its Lahore Edition of 27-8-1993 "The News", a daily newspaper, published an item, alleging that Mr. Justice Dr. Nasim Hasan Shah, Chief Justice of this Court, had commercialised a residential plot situate in Gulberg, Lahore, without paying the commercialisation charges or obtaining a licence from the Lahore Development Authority and on this account he owed an amount of Rs3.7 million to the said Authority. The item appeared prominently on the front page and a part of it was carried over to page 5. It was totally incorrect and without any foundation and was on the very day of its publication contradicted by the Authority. In its issue of 30-8-1993 the said newspaper published an apology in the following terms: ' The News International regrets the publication of a news regarding non-payment of commercialization charges by the Hon'ble Chief Justice in its issue of August 27, 1993.
' The management of the Paper tenders its unqualified apology to the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the Supreme Court for the same."
' The apology was printed at a less prominent place even though on the front page. It did not care to mention that the item was baseless.
2. As the said item was highly defamatory of the Hon'ble Chief Justice and had the effect of scandalizing the highest Court of the country, notices of contempt were issued to the respondents, namely, the printer and publisher of the newspaper, Mir Javed-ur-Rehman, its editor, MA. Niazi, and the reporter who had provided the item, Sultan J. Qureshi. The three respondents appeared before this Court on 1-9-1993. They submitted a joint written statement. They did not deny that the impugned item was incorrect. On the other hand, they tendered an unqualified apology, prayed for forgiveness and placed themseleves at the mercy of the Court. They further stated that they held the Courts of the country, judiciary and Judges in the highest esteem. Mir Javedur-Rehman was stated to have issued standing instructions to his subordinates for taking utmost care and caution before publishing reports relating inter alia to the Courts, Judges and Judiciary. The respondents voluntarily undertook to publish another apology in today's issue as prominently as the impugned news item was printed. To give them an opportunity in this regard the proceedings were adjourned till today and it was made very clear to them that though the publication of the apology might be considered as a mitigating circumstance yet it would not have the effect of absolving them of the offence of Contempt of Court of which they were being accused.
3. In accordance with the offer made by the respondents an apology has appeared in today's issue of the newspaper. It reads as follows:-- ' The News' very humbly apologises to the honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan, Mr. Justice Dr. Syed Nasim. Hasan Shah for publication of a news item captioned as 'The defaulter finance minister launches recovery campaign' published in the Lahore Edition of `The News' on August 27, written by its correspondent Sultan J. Qureshi.
' Upon verification of facts reported in that news item The News' has found that the Honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan neither owns the said property taken on rent by the TCS couriers nor his Lordship has any concern with the same.
' Therefore, his Lordship has absolutely nothing to do with the alleged unauthorised commercialisation of that property or avoidance of payment of commercialisation fee thereof to the LDA.
' The News' very sincerely regrets the publication of the said news item which has cast undue aspersions on the Honourable Chief Justice of Pakistan and it tenders an unconditional apology to his Lordship in this respect."
' The respondents are present in Court with their counsel, Mr. Asadullah Siddiqui. They have undertaken not to publish in future any report at least about the judiciary in their paper without strict verification with regard to its accuracy.
4. From the statements made today by them through their counsel and also by Sultan J. Qureshi personally, we are satisfied that they are truly sorry and repentant for having published a totally false report concerning the Hon'ble Chief Justice of this Court and have done their best to mitigate their offence by publishing a detailed apology at a prominent place in their newspaper. In the circumstances, we do not consider it appropriate to take any further action against them apart from issuing them with a severe warning. After all the main object of the contempt proceedings is to rehabilitate the dignity and honour of the Court and these are never intended to avenge personal insults. In fact initiation of such proceedings is a source of embarrassment to the Judges themselves but they perforce have to take recourse to them in order to save and protect the institution which creates balance in the society from attempts aimed at destroying its utility and efficacy.
5. Taking all the circumstances into consideration we administer severe warning to the respondents and discharge the notices issued to them.