Former Gilgit-Baltistan chief justice Rana Shamim on Monday issued an unconditional apology to the Islamabad High Court in the contempt of court case against him.
The case was initiated against Shamim after he had signed an affidavit, wherein he had levelled allegations against ex-chief justice of Pakistan Saqib Nisar about him manipulating judicial proceedings to deny bails to the top PML-N leadership before the general elections in 2018.
In his apology during the proceeding, Shamim said that the name of a presiding high court senior judge – Justice Amir Farooq – was written in the affidavit instead of the former senior judge.
He added that the affidavit was written after three years, under “extreme mental stress” and at the age of 72. “I deeply regret the mistake and apologise unconditionally to the court,” he stated, furthering that he could never think of “scandalising” the judiciary.
The former G-B chief judge said he was “sorrowful and regretful” since the proceedings against him started last year. Rana Shamim stated that he had expressed from the beginning that the situation had arisen due to his misunderstanding.
“No serving judge of this court is involved in this dispute,” he reiterated. He “apologised unconditionally to all serving judges” of the court for his “misunderstanding” and left himself to the mercy” of the court.
He pleaded with the high court that his apology is accepted. The former G-B CJ also submitted a written apology to the IHC through his lawyer Abdul Latif Afridi.
Last week, the IHC had given Rana Shamim ‘a last chance’ to submit a list of witnesses who would depose to substantiate allegations in the affidavit against Saqib Nisar.
IHC Chief Justice Athar Minallah had resumed the hearing of a case concerning the former chief judge of G-B’s affidavit published in a national daily accusing the former CJP of delaying the release of Nawaz Sharif and his daughter Maryam Nawaz on bail after their conviction in the Avenfield Properties’ case.
The court warned that if Shamim failed to submit the list of witnesses, it would be assumed that his affidavit was not valid.