Asserts to have the utmost respect for the judge and this court.
ISLAMABAD: The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Thursday deferred contempt proceedings against PTI chief Imran Khan after he expressed the willingness to apologise to Additional District and Sessions Judge Zeba Chaudhry.
Imran was facing contempt charges after criticising Judge Chaudhry at a rally in Islamabad’s F-9 Park on August 20. Judge Chaudhry had ordered PTI leader Shahbaz Gill’s physical remand in a sedition case.
The PTI head will be charged on September 22 after the IHC deemed his updated response in the case “unsatisfactory” at the last session.
The case was heard by a bigger bench, presided over by IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah, and including Justices Mohsin Akhtar Kayani, Miangul Hassan Aurangzeb, Tariq Mehmood Jahangiri, and Babar Sattar.
The former prime minister spoke during the inquiry on Thursday. He said he was denied the right to testify at the previous hearing and asked the judge for permission to record his remarks.
He informed the court, “I am prepared to apologise to the female judge. “The court believes that I have gone too far. I didn’t mean to intimidate the female judge. I am willing to personally go to the judge and apologise if the court orders it,” he said.
I tell the court that I won’t act in a similar manner in the future, he continued. “I apologise if I crossed the line.”
The IHC CJ then instructed Imran to submit an affidavit and said that the PTI leader’s statement will be recorded by the court. The IHC CJ instructed, “Submit an affidavit outlining what you have said.”
The IHC bench stated that whether you choose to see the judge in person is entirely up to you. The judge noted, “If you have acknowledged [your] error and are prepared to apologise for it that is sufficient.”
The court then postponed the hearing to October 3 and ordered the PTI leader to file an affidavit within a week.
Imran declared in a press conference following the hearing that the PTI’s drive for “Haqeeqi Azaadi” (genuine freedom) was opposed to mafias. “I don’t want to battle the judiciary in Pakistan.”
Imran was pursued by reporters earlier as he, party leaders Shah Mahmood Qureshi, Asad Umar, and Shibli Faraz, made their way to court.
As he made his way to the courtroom, the man, who was wearing a black shalwar kameez and a grey waistcoat, smiled at the reporters but avoided answering their inquiries. Television footage showed Faraz vying for position behind Imran.
After the hearing, PTI Senator Faisal Javed spoke with the media outside the court and claimed that Imran had always discussed respecting the law and the courts in their meetings.
“Today, Imran Khan’s position from the first day was upheld. Hopefully, Imran Khan will win the court’s ruling, he continued.
The coalition government’s days in office, according to Javed, were numbered. “That day is not far off,” he continued, “when Imran Khan will once more take the oath as Pakistan’s [prime minister] and enter the assembly with more than two-thirds majority.” He claimed that after Imran made his call, a “sea of people” would move toward Islamabad.
Justice Aamer Farooq decided to start Imran’s contempt case while debating a plea that questioned Gill’s police remand. Imran received a summons from the court on August 31 and a show-cause notice shortly after.
A day before the hearing, the former prime minister submitted a reply before the IHC wherein he expressed his willingness to “take back” his words about the judge if they were “regarded as inappropriate” and pleaded before the IHC that the judges who had agreed to initiate the case against him should consider withdrawing themselves from the bench as, according to him, they had pre-judged the matter.
However, the IHC had deemed the response to be “unsatisfactory” and asked the PTI chief to submit a “well-considered” response.
Following this, Imran submitted a fresh reply in the court. In the revised response, however, Imran stopped short of rendering an unconditional apology. He stated that “I have a profound regard and respect for this honourable court and its subordinate courts and judge”.
On September 8, the IHC decided to Indict Imran, once again calling his response “unsatisfactory”.
“The learned counsel for the respondent took us through the supplementary response filed by the respondent and submitted that it was an explanation of the speech in relation to which contempt proceedings have been initiated,” the court order stated.
The court maintained that it considered the response filed by Imran and did not find it satisfactory. “We are not convinced that the respondent has purged himself of the wrongdoing alleged against him in relation to whom the show cause notice was issued,” the IHC added.
