| Case ID |
d6f03670-00e6-457c-95a6-5c0b50748170 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Original Miscellaneous No. 10 of 1975 |
| Decision Date |
Jan 27, 1976 |
| Hearing Date |
|
| Decision |
The court found that the allegations made against the Civil Judge and First Class Magistrate were unfounded, and there were significant discrepancies in the signature of the respondent Muhammad Urs on the application to the Prime Minister. As a result, the notice under section 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act issued against the respondent was recalled and vacated. The court emphasized that disputed questions of fact could not be resolved in summary proceedings under the Act. |
| Summary |
This case revolves around the proceedings initiated under the Contempt of Courts Act of 1926 against Muhammad Urs, who was accused of making scandalous allegations against a Civil Judge and First Class Magistrate. The core of the matter was an application made to the Prime Minister, which led to an inquiry. The learned Sessions Judge, after reviewing the allegations, concluded they were false and referred the case to the Sindh High Court for further action. During the proceedings, discrepancies in the signatures of Muhammad Urs raised doubts about the authenticity of the allegations. The court ultimately decided to vacate the contempt notice, emphasizing that factual disputes cannot be resolved in summary proceedings. This case highlights the importance of maintaining the integrity of judicial processes and the legal protections against unfounded allegations, making it a crucial reference point in understanding contempt of court proceedings. |
| Court |
Sindh High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
Not available
|
| Judges |
ABDUL HAQEE KURESHI, J
|
| Lawyers |
Muhammad Ali Shaikh
|
| Petitioners |
The State
|
| Respondents |
Muhammad Urs
|
| Citations |
1976 SLD 1058,
1976 PCRLJ 517
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Contempt of Courts Act, 1926
|
| Sections |
3
|