![](https://i0.wp.com/dailyuniversal.digital/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/dc-islamaabd.jpg?fit=194%2C259&ssl=1)
In Islamabad, the Deputy Commissioner (DC) is facing a contempt of court charge for arresting PTI leaders under Maintenance of Public Order (MPO) orders.
In a recent hearing at the Islamabad High Court, the DC and the SSP Operations were indicted in the contempt of court case for overstepping their authority by issuing MPO orders against Shehryar Afridi and Shandana Gulzar.
During the court proceedings, the DC of Islamabad, Irfan Nawaz Memon, offered an unconditional apology. Justice Babar Sattar responded by stating that the charge sheet was meant to be filed that day, and he even mentioned the possibility of a six-month imprisonment. He implied that experiencing time in jail might provide insight into the conditions others endure there.
The DC and SSP Operations, Irfan Nawaz Memon and Jameel Zafar, respectively, submitted an explanatory reply to the court. Advocate General Islamabad, Ayaz Shaukat, also appeared as the prosecutor in the case.
Justice Babar Sattar formally charged the DC with contempt of court due to an alleged abuse of authority. When asked about the allegations, the DC denied any wrongdoing, prompting Justice Sattar to remind him that the charges had been read aloud in open court.
The process of indicting SSP Operations, Jameel Zafar, also began during the hearing. He, too, denied any wrongdoing and requested time to present a defense.
SP Farooq Buttar was similarly charged with contempt during the hearing, and he also denied the allegations. Subsequently, the court appointed lawyer Qaiser Imam as the prosecutor in the defamation case.
The Islamabad High Court rejected the unconditional pardon offered by the accused, including the DC of Islamabad. Prior to the indictment, the Advocate General argued that the officers had already apologized unconditionally, suggesting that charges should not be filed. However, Justice Babar Sattar disagreed, emphasizing that the contempt of court case was ongoing and MPO orders were still being issued.
The court ultimately dismissed the advocate general’s request and proceeded to charge all the named officers.