The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday issued a contempt of court notice to former prime minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf in the rental power projects (RPPs) case.
A three-member SC bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry heard case of Raja Pervaiz Ashraf’s letter to the SC in which he had asked for a commission to inquire into RPPs case.
The court asked him to appear in person before the bench in two weeks.
Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry had said in Wednesday’s hearing that the former PM had tried to influence the court by writing a letter for constituting a commission to investigate the RPPs scam.
The chief justice said Ashraf had already accepted the court’s decision in the RPPs case that had attained finality, so there was no need to re-examine the verdict and form a commission to probe into the issue.
The chief justice said the review petition was withdrawn in the RPPs case, so how was it possible to revisit the court’s verdict and appoint the commission.
Earlier, appearing before the court on notice, NAB Prosecutor General KK Agha submitted before the court that although he did not agree with the letter, if the court referred the matter to any other forum for probe, he would have no objection.
Wasim Sajjad submitte
SC serves contempt notice on Raja Pervaiz Ashraf
Orders former PM appear before bench in person in two weeks
ISLAMABAD
INP
The Supreme Court (SC) on Thursday issued a contempt of court notice to former prime minister Raja Pervaiz Ashraf in the rental power projects (RPPs) case.
A three-member SC bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry heard case of Raja Pervaiz Ashraf’s letter to the SC in which he had asked for a commission to inquire into RPPs case.
The court asked him to appear in person before the bench in two weeks.
Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry had said in Wednesday’s hearing that the former PM had tried to influence the court by writing a letter for constituting a commission to investigate the RPPs scam.
The chief justice said Ashraf had already accepted the court’s decision in the RPPs case that had attained finality, so there was no need to re-examine the verdict and form a commission to probe into the issue.
The chief justice said the review petition was withdrawn in the RPPs case, so how was it possible to revisit the court’s verdict and appoint the commission.
Earlier, appearing before the court on notice, NAB Prosecutor General KK Agha submitted before the court that although he did not agree with the letter, if the court referred the matter to any other forum for probe, he would have no objection.
Wasim Sajjad submitted that his client had dispatched the letter to the chief justice of Pakistan through the SC registrar’s office, adding that it was not aimed at influencing the court.
He further contended that an impression was created in the media that if the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) decided the case in favour of Ashraf, it would have been considered that the former prime minister used his influence.
The chief justice said the letter was written on the letterhead of prime minister and did not give a positive impression, adding that such type of dispatches should not be addressed to the court.
Justice Gulzar Ahmed also observed that such type of letters in a personal capacity of the prime minister should not be addressed to the court.
d that his client had dispatched the letter to the chief justice of Pakistan through the SC registrar’s office, adding that it was not aimed at influencing the court.
He further contended that an impression was created in the media that if the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) decided the case in favour of Ashraf, it would have been considered that the former prime minister used his influence.
The chief justice said the letter was written on the letterhead of prime minister and did not give a positive impression, adding that such type of dispatches should not be addressed to the court.
Justice Gulzar Ahmed also observed that such type of letters in a personal capacity of the prime minister should not be addressed to the court.