An unfortunate incident took place in the Court of Mr. Muhammad Mujahid Hussain Sheikh, Acting District and Sessions Judge, Bahalwalnagar which may best be reproduced in his own words as per reference made by him to this Court: "With heavy heart I have the honour to bring into your kind notice the unfortunate incident which took place in my Court on 12-8-1993. I was hearing a bail application titled Muhammad Aslam etc. v. State. The A.S.I. Muhammad Zaffarullah, C.I.A. Staff, Bahawalnagar appeared in my Court in the capacity of the Investigating Officer. In response to a query of mine, he showed the sinister and rude attitude. For his contemptuous behaviour, I selected to try him under section 476, Cr.P.C. Far the offence of 228, P.P.C. I got a written notice served upon him and gave him the time for the reply.
Although after his apprehension the accused officer was given into the custody of the police guard but he was given the facility of sitting in his office by the District Attorney Abdul Haleem. There, the D.S.Ps. Malik Abdul Aziz, Shaukat Murtaza and Syed Safdar Hussain Shah also joined with him. The Deputy District Attorney Mr. Abdur Rauf Dasti also happened to be there for the active support of the delinquent police officer. This Dy.D.A. Is a very notorious and corrupt person. He lives in the house of the ex-Law Minister Ch. Abdul Ghafoor and due to that reason, he has developed the obnoxious and affronting arrogance. Prompted by the same he cares a fig for the Courts and their decorum. At my initiation the District Attorney transferred him from my Court. Due to this reason he developed and estrangement towards me. Seeing a good occasion of vindicating the grudge towards me, Mr. Abdur Rauf Dasti ventured to help the accused A.S.I. When I opened the find Box for the disposal of the urgent bail petitions the Dy.D.A. Abdur Rauf Dasti appeared in the Court along with the accused A.S.I. He began to agitate the matter like anything. At my very face he challenged my authority of apprehending a police officer. He uttered many other objectionable sentences and cast aspersions on me. I asked Mr. Abdul Rauf Dasti to leave my Court-room but he refused to obey my order. After a great deal of reluctance, he skipped away, ultimately. I became busy in my Court work. Meanwhile the A.S.I. Submitted his reply in regard to the show-cause notice. I convicted the A.S.I. Under section 228, P.P.C. And awarded him the punishment of 3 months simple imprisonment along with a fine of Rs,1,000. At his conviction the accused officer was taken into custody and delivered to the Naib Court Muhammad Shafique Constable No,615/C-II for committing him to the Jail. The police officer escaped from the custody of the Naib Court with the active assistance of the constables Shafat Ali and Ameer. Therefore, an F.I.R. Under sections 224 and 225-A, P.P.C. Was ordered to be registered against the persons at fault. A perpetual warrant for arrest of the escaped police officer was also issued to the Superintendent of Police, Bahawalnagar.
After a while, when the Court time had become over, Mr Abdur Rauf Dasti appeared in my chamber in a very dashing way, after crossing the dais of the Court, he rushed into the retiring room without my permission. Mr. K.M. Sohel, Senior Civil Judge, Bahawalnagar, was also sitting with me. After .a few minutes the three D.S.Ps. Who have been named above also entered in the retiring room in the same manner. I asked the D.S.Ps. To leave my retiring room. They went outside after showing the protesting demeanour. The Dy.D.A. Abdur Rauf Dasti fell back upon me and he began to cry like anything. He did not show me any regard and passed many objectionable remarks against me. I tried my level best that the better sense should prevail upon him but all in vain. Therefore I asked Naib asid to take the entleman out. The D .D.A. began to scuffle with the Naib Oasid and refused to leave the retiring room. Ultimately, the Senior Civil Judge stood up and he took him out of my Chamebr. Had the Senior Civil Judge not been alive to the occasion, the Dy.D.A. Would have physically attacked me. In the meanwhile the three D.S.Ps. Had surrounded my Court by deploying the force of the police station of City Bahawalnagar. Apart from hurling the numerous abuses upon me, the D.S.P. Mr. Safdar Hussain Shah also insulted the Senior Civil Judge in the presence of hundreds of people. In order to avoid the more deterioration of the situation, the Senior Civil Judge pocketed the insult. For bringing about the respite, the Senior Civil Judge began to advise the police officers to remain peaceful and within their limits. He took them to his retiring room and requested them that they should ask the polite force and the people to disperse. On the advice of the Senior Civil Judge, the police officers ordered the people to disperse from the spot. Themselves, they again gathered in the office of the District Attorney Mr. Abdul Haleem. From there, they sent me the message of facing the dire consequences or to accept the bail application of the convicted/absconder police officer in an uncalled for and unwarranted way.
Due to the hooliganism and highhandedness of the abovenamed police officers and of Mr. Abdur Rauf Dasti Dy.D.A. I remained virtually confined in my retiring room till 4-30 p.m. The D.S.P. Syed Safdar Hussain Shah also threatened that he would register some false case to teach me a lesson. In the last, it is reiterated that the above named D.S.Ps. And the Dy.D.A. Behaved just like the rascals-and the rogues to overawe me. Therefore, in the wider public interest and for the prestige of the judiciary, they deserve to lie fixed up and punished severely. Accordingly, it is requested that the appropriate punitive action may be taken against the D.S.Ps. Malik Abdul Aziz, Shaukat Murtaza and Syed Safdar Hussain Shah and the Dy.D.A. Mr. Abdur Rauf Dasti. The appropriate copies, of the record are annexed herewith for your kind perusal. Submitted please." (Underlining is mine).
2. The file reveals that the matter was processed in this Court on the administrative side. The opinion of the learned Advocate-General, Punjab was also solicited. Since the facts revealed commission of contempt of Court of the grossest type, this Court decided to proceed in the matter on judicial side by issuing contempt notices to the respondents/contemners. Accordingly the case was registered as Criminal Original No,78 of 1994 and notices were issued to the respondents viz. (i)
Safdar Hussain Shah, the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, (ii) Malik Abdul Aziz Khan the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, (iii) Shaukat Murtaza, the then Deputy Superintendent of Police,
(iv) Malik Zafarullah, the then Assistant Sub-Inspector Police, and (v) Abdur Rauf Dasti, the then Deputy District Attorney. Notice was also issued to the learned Advocate-General, Punjab to nominate a law officer for prosecuting the reference.
3. It may be noted that during the pendency, Safdar Hussain Shah, Deputy Superintendent of Police was reported to have died. Vide order dated 13-10-1998, the proceedings against him were directed to be dropped, as these had abated.
4. The perusal of the file further reveals that for one reason or the other the proceedings dragged on. Most of the time, the respondents/contemners did not appear because they were transferred from one place to other and their service was not being affected. Ultimately, even though through bailable warrants, all the respondents entered appearance. Initially Malik Abdul Aziz Khan, respondent/contemner filed a reply dated 20-6-1997 wherein the allegations levelled in the reference were described as baseless and devoid of facts and this respondent proceeded to give his own version of the events. Subsequently, however, when the proceedings were taken in hand and in full earnest, this respondent along with Malik Zaffarullah and Shaukat Murtaza tendered unconditional apology through their learned counsel Mr. Muhammad Farooq Bedar, Advocate. This was on 9-4-1999. Mr. Muhammad Farooq Bedar, Advocate, also submitted that the reply of Malik Abdul Aziz, respondent/contemner already submitted be read in the light of his above statement.
Abdul Rauf Dasti, respondent/contemner sought time to contest the notice and file his separate reply. The matter was adjourned to 10-5-1999 to enable him to do so. It was indicated to Mr. Muhammad Farooq Bedar, Advocate, that if so advised he may as well place on record a written unconditional apology.
5. On 10-5-1999, an unconditional written apology was filed on behalf of respondents/contemners Malik Abdul Aziz Khan, Shaukat Murtaza and Zafarullah. Wakalatnama of Mr. Muhammad Kazim Khan, Advocate, on behalf of Abdur Rauf Dasti, respondent/contemner was placed on record. The case was adjourned to 25-5-1999 to enable Abdur Rauf Dasti, respondent/contemner to place on record his reply. It was made clear to him that this would be the last chance for placing on record the reply.
6. No reply on his behalf has been placed on record. However, his learned counsel Mr. Muhammad Kazim Khan, Advocate, has tendered unconditional apology and has prayed that contempt notice against Abdur Rauf Dasti, respondent/contemner be withdrawn. Mr. Muhammad Farooq Bedar, Advocate, as already noted, reiterated unconditional apology on behalf of other respondents/contemners and also prayed that the notices be discharged. These two learned counsel were directed to assist me with reference to case-law that in such circumstances, an unconditional apology operates to purge the contempt and entitle the respondents to claim acquittal. However, these two learned counsel did not cite any case-law in support of the prayer that their respective clients be let off.
7. The question whether an unconditional apology will purge the contempt is dependent upon facts and circumstances of a given case and the discretion of the Court. The relevant considerations are the nature and gravity of contempt, whether unconditional apology is tendered at the earliest, whether the Court is satisfied regarding its genuineness and contriteness and further that it is not meant to avoid punishment. The contemners have to show genuine remorse about the conduct of which they are accused of.
8. The perusal of the reference of the learned Judge shows that the matter is extremely serious. The annoyance of Zafarullah, Assistant Sub-Inspector Police in respect of action taken against him by the learned Judge is understandable (though not condonable) but the conduct of the other respondents, senior police officers and a law man, particularly, in forcing their entrance into the retiring room of the learned Judge, their insolent and threatening/abusing language and later on their surrounding the Court-room so as to confine him in Chamber till 4-30 p.m., cannot be explained except on the hypothesis that they cared little about the Court and its processes and they wanted to have the order against Zafarullah, Assistant Sub-Inspector reversed even it had to be done by coercion or by show of force. Malik Abdul Aziz, respondent/contemner in his first reply dated 20-6-1997 contested the allegations. It was much later and possibly due to observations of this Court on a few dates of hearing that this respondent chose to tender unconditional apology.
Shaukat Murtaza and Zafarullah respondents/contemners followed the line of Malik Abdul Aziz, respondent/contemner and also chose to tender unconditional apology. It is clear that the written apology tendered on 10-5-1999 is belated and as noted may have been motivated by observations of this Court. Abdul Rauf Dasti, respondent/contemnber was given number of opportunities to file a reply which he did not, even today. His learned counsel, however, has tendered unconditional apology verbally. This apology is also belated. This respondent has not availed of quite a few opportunities to file a written reply. In his wisdom, he has chosen to avail of none. Verbal apology, therefore, has to be rejected.
9. Three of the respondents are members of police force which, exists to implement and protect the law. The forth is a law man, and in a way, part and parcel of the Court. The conduct of these respondents, as detailed in the reference is simply atrocious. They have by their conduct ridiculed the Judge/Court and lowered its authority and prestige, right in the view of the public. Keeping in view all the above circumstances I hold that the unconditional apology does not suffice to purge the contempt nor entitle the respondents/contemners to discharge. I would, therefore, proceed to convict each of the above four respondents under section 4 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1976 (the law applicable at the time of commission of contempt) and punish them to simple imprisonment till rising of the Court and further impose a fine of Rs,100 (Rupees one hundred only) upon each of the respondents/contemners. On failure to pay the fine, each of the respondents/contemners shall have to suffer simple imprisonment for seven days. I have taken the lenient view in the matter of sentence, on account of respondents' above said apology and their throwing themselves at the mercy of the Court.
10. Copy of this judgment shall be sent to the Home Secretary, Government of Punjab, Inspector- General of Police, Punjab and Secretary, Law Department; Province of Punjab.