Supreme Court of Pakistan (Appellate Jurisdiction)
Hira Rauf v. Rear Admiral (Retd.) Mushtaq Ahmed and others
Criminal Appeal No. 10-K of 2024 (against Sindh High Court order dated 19 November 2024 in H.C.A. No. 484 of 2024)
Citation: Approved for reporting; reported citation not yet assigned
Question of law
The legal question
Whether a court may take cognizance of contempt or fix a date for framing charge under Section 17(3) without first giving the alleged contemner an opportunity of preliminary hearing and forming a prima facie satisfaction that the interest of justice requires further proceedings.
Holding
What the Court decided
No. Section 17(3) makes the preliminary hearing and the court's prima facie satisfaction conditions that precede cognizance or the fixing of a charge. The Single Judge moved directly to the charge stage, and the Division Bench overlooked that procedural lapse.
Result
Outcome and directions
The appeal was allowed. The Single Judge's order dated 30 October 2024 and the Division Bench's order dated 19 November 2024 were set aside to the extent of the contempt proceedings. The contempt application remains pending and may proceed only after a preliminary hearing and a decision on whether a prima facie contempt case exists.
Judgment text is provided for legal research and general information. Verify the official court record before relying on it in proceedings.
Independent analysis
Read Shahbaz Shah's legal commentary
In Hira Rauf, the Supreme Court held that Section 17(3) requires a preliminary hearing before cognizance or framing a contempt charge.
Read full commentary →