ISLAMABAD, Nov 18: The Supreme Court rejected on Monday an intra-court appeal of Defence Secretary retired Lt Gen Asif Yasin against his trial for contempt of court.

“We would not like to make any comment on the objections raised, because you (defence secretary) still have an opportunity to raise the same before the trial court,” a five-judge bench headed by Justice Nasirul Mulk held.

A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry had indicted the defence secretary on Nov 5 for not honouring his undertaking to hold the local government elections in cantonment boards by Sept 15. The same bench is likely to resume the trial on Nov 20.

On Nov 8, the larger bench had stayed the trial court from the contempt proceedings till the time it finished with the secretary’s intra-court appeal.

The larger bench dismissed the intra-court appeal after Additional Attorney General Shahkhawar opposed it on the ground that the secretary still had the opportunity to agitate the issue before the trial court, especially in the changed scenario when the Election Commission itself had excused from holding the local government elections in the country, including the cantonment boards, and that had also been allowed by the apex court.

Representing the defence secretary, Advocate Iftikhar Gilani said it was not in the command of his client to hold elections and the apology tendered by him should have been accepted by the trial court.

Justice Nasirul Mulk observed that in contempt cases apology could not be accepted when the respondent requested to accept it but at the same time insisted that the order of the apex court would not be implemented.

The counsel, however, contended that under the rules of business the competent authority to finally grant approval for holding the local government elections was the prime minister and the defence secretary had held out the assurance to hold the polls on the advice of Attorney General Muneer A. Malik.

Mr Gilani requested the court to set aside the trial court’s decision of framing of charges against his client, but the court said that this would mean quashing the indictment.