ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court hearing on PTI Chairman Imran Khan’s plea to quash an FIR over the murder of a lawyer in Quetta turned unpleasant on Wednesday when one of the counsel hurled accusations against two members of the bench.

The counsel, who is representing the son of deceased Abdul Razzaq Shar, even refused to tender an unqualified apology, although he expressed regrets for his behaviour. He, however, asked the court to initiate contempt proceedings against him.

Justice Yahya Afridi, who is heading a three-judge Supreme Court bench, observed that the court would issue a written order since the judges did not seem inclined to accept an apology from the counsel.

It all started when Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi, a member of the bench, asked Advocate Amanullah Kanrani, who was representing the son of Abdul Razzaq Shar, whether he had read the FIR lodged in the case.

Counsel for Razzaq Shar’s son refuses to apologise for allegations against the bench during hearing of Imran’s plea to quash FIR

Mr Kanrani replied that not only had he read the FIR but also the order in which a judge, while hearing the case of Ghulam Mehmood Dogar, a former Ca­­pital City Police Officer (CCPO) of Lah­ore, had suggested initiating suo motu action over the delay in elections to the Punjab Assembly after its dissolution.

Continuing his tirade against the judges, the counsel then turned towards Justice Syed Hasan Azhar Rizvi and alleged that a case was pending against him from the time he was a junior judge in the Sindh High Court (SHC).

Justice Rizvi rebuked the counsel for indulging in character assassination of judges, also wondering about the nature of the case which, according to the counsel, was pending at SHC.

“Either come up with evidence or face contempt charges for levelling allegations,” Justice Rizvi said.

The lawyer should retract his allegations, the judge said.

When Amanullah Kanrani returned to his seat, Justice Afridi said if he had reservations about the composition of the bench, he should have furnished it in writing.

“You have to be answerable for the allegations you have levelled since we are not weak,” Justice Naqvi observed, wondering had he been “assigned by someone to level allegations against judges”. But Mr Kanrani retorted that judges should hear the matter on merit, also stating that he was not a “slave to judges”.

“Are we slaves,” Justice Naqvi said, directing the counsel to tender an unqualified apology immediately.

Justice Afridi asked the lawyer again to tender an apology for his “inappropriate attitude”.

‘Verbal apology’

The counsel offered a “verbal apology” to Justice Afridi and requested that the case be heard on merit. “Absolutely not,” came the response by Justice Naqvi after Justice Afridi asked him whether he was accepting the apology or not.

On the other hand, Justice Rizvi said he was ready to accept the apology if the counsel retracted his allegations.

Amanullah Kanrani tendered a verbal apology with folded hands, but said he would raise his voice if “judges become a party to the case”.

Justice Afridi, however, asked the lawyer to furnish a written apology, but he retorted he would not do so.

The court adjourned the hearing to Aug 24 with a directive that the previous order barring the authorities from arresting Imran Khan in the Abdul Razzaq Shar case would remain in force.

Published in Dawn, August 10th, 2023