calculated policy of maligning people remarked, “You first air programme to malign people then tender apology and after tendering apology, you again aired programme. Nowadays you are airing programmes about the high court judges,” Justice Ijaz said.
Salman Iqbal claimed ignorance about the said programme, arguing that it was very difficult for him to monitor every programme and ticker. He said that there were over 3,000 employees and anchors in his channel.
“You are well aware as every programme is the outcome of the policy and the policy comes from the top management, hence, you are responsible for this,” Justice Ijaz told the ARY chief.“We know everything and we are not the slaves of your lawyers who seek adjournments,” the judge said. “Your channel also runs some good programmes including on religious matters but why you are bent upon maligning the people in your programmes.”
During the course of hearing, the court directed Pemra General Manager Muhammad Tahir, who was present in the courtroom, to strictly monitor the programmes aired by ARY.The court on January 5 indicted Salman Iqbal and Mubasher Lucman in a contempt of court case for maligning the judiciary while airing a programme.
The court after rejecting the unconditional apologies submitted by Salman Iqbal and Mubasher had framed charges of contempt against them for maligning the judiciary while airing a programme.
The court directed Attorney General Salman Aslam Butt to submit the list of witnesses in 15 days for prosecuting Salman Iqbal and Mubasher. In pursuance of the court order, the attorney general submitted before the court the list of evidence, affidavits and other documents in the contempt case.
On Thursday, Deputy Attorney General Sajid Ilyas Bhatti appeared before the court and submitted that Attorney General Salman Aslam Butt was abroad, adding that they had already submitted the list of evidence, affidavits and other documents in the instant contempt case.Meanwhile, the court adjourned the hearing till April 9 asking the ARY chief if his lawyer remained absent, proceedings in the case would continue.