High court dismisses plea accusing Imran Khan of contempt of court
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Tuesday dismissed the plea seeking disqualification of Prime Minister Imran Khan over alleged contempt of court.
The petition, filed by Advocate Saleemullah Khan on Monday, said that the prime minister had made anti-judiciary comments during the speech at the inauguration ceremony of Havelian-Thakot section of Hazara motorway.
The summary of the application had said that he had lambasted the judges of the high court and their decision, which was contempt of court. The advocate had said the Supreme Court had issued a contempt of court notice against Imran Khan in 2013 as well over his speeches during the sit-in protest.
In his recent speech, Imran Khan had asked the chief justice to restore trust of the masses on judiciary. He had also pointed out the disparity in serving of justice towards rich and poor in the country.
Also Read: Plea seeking Imran Khan’s disqualification filed in high court
“The impression of separate legal systems for rich and poor should be eradicated,” he had pleaded.
During the hearing, IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah said the judiciary welcomed the criticism.
On Nov 20, Chief Justice of Pakistan Asif Saeed Khan Khosa had responded to the remarks made by PM Imran Khan.
“I don’t want to speak up exactly about the case that PM Khan talked about, but we disqualified two prime ministers, convicted one PM and verdict regarding former army chief’s case is going to be announced (soon),” Asif Khosa had said adding that only a couple of powerful people would be there in cases with the judiciary.
“Don’t taunt us of powerful people. Today’s judiciary should not be compared with the judiciary of pre-2009. We did exemplary work in less resources. We never sought money from anybody for reforms in judiciary. We have finished criminal backlog of last 25 years,” he had said.
He had said the PM himself had decided to let him (Nawaz) go abroad. The high court had made only a partial decision, he said.
The top justice had said those criticizing judges should be vigilant. No one was powerful before them, but the law, he had maintained. He had said the PM should also be careful while choosing words for judges.
