ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its verdict on the reasons for further proceedings to frame contempt of court charges against senator Babar Awan.
The two-meber bench comprising Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan and Justice AtharSaeed told Barrister Ali Zafar, counsel for Babar, that the judgement would be spelled out on April 24.
The bench said that they would also cite reasons to proceed further into the matter.
The bench resumed hearing of a suo motu notice taken on Babar Awan's address at a press conference held in Press Information Department on December 2, after initial order of the larger bench on the memo issue.
Barrister Ali Zafar said that his client had tendered a written apology which must be considered and the further proceedings for framing of contempt of court charges should be dropped.
He said the dignity of the court vested in accepting the apology and not 'in rubbing someone's nose'.
He said under Islamic jurisdiction and contempt of court laws, if an unconditional apology was tendered, the purpose of maintaining the dignity of court was served.
He urged that the court was like parents and had to uphold the dignity and not to take punitive actions.
He contended that before coming to conclusion to proceed further, the court should give reasons. "Why the practiced process in Babar Awan's case is departed which has been in practice since 1964," he questioned.
Citing a judicial verdict of 1964, he said the High Court decision to proceed further in contempt of court matter even after submission of an unconditional apology, the Supreme Court had struck it down.
Justice Athar Saeed told the counsel that the apology had to be considered in earlier stages but his client had waited for the stage till charges were framed and then submitted the apology.
Justice Ejaz Afzal told the counsel that they could not say at this stage that they were not considering his apology.
Barrister Ali contended that it was not known in the judicial history of the country that after an apology was tendered, the contempt proceedings should continue.
He said that in case of departure from the previous practice, the bench had to give reasons. "OK, give reasons and I will challenge it. But without reasons you cannot do it as it is not possible for you," he added.
When the issue came up before a 16-member larger bench which made strong observations, for violating its orders, but it also held the previous practice by dropping the contempt proceedings, he added.
The counsel said that the instant issue could be referred to the larger bench. Justice Ejaz told him that it was the discretion of the court to determine whether there was bona fide intentions or not.
Ali argued that the court could not proceed in the air and it had to cite reasons for departing from the previous practice. He said in Nawaz Sharif's assault case, the court had treated it differently.