LAHORE: The Lahore High Court on Tuesday summoned the relevant record in a contempt of court petition against the deputy commissioner for denying permission to Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) to hold a public rally at Minar-i-Pakistan last year.

PTI-Punjab Vice President Akmal Khan Bari filed the petition through his counsel Khurram Latif Khosa.

Presenting his arguments, the petitioner’s counsel told the court that PTI had approached the DC Lahore to seek permission for a rally at Minar-i-Pakistan. However, he said, the DC failed to decide the application despite a court’s direction.

He argued that non-compliance with court orders amounts to contempt of court.

He asked the court to initiate contempt proceedings against the DC for ignoring the judicial order.

During the proceedings, Assistant Advocate General Farrukh Khan Lodhi submitted a written reply on behalf of the deputy commissioner. He said the government had granted permission to the petitioner to hold a rally at an alternative venue.

Justice Farooq Haider directed the law officer to present complete record of the case at the next hearing.

HARASSMENT: Separately, Justice Farooq Haider reserved a verdict on another contempt petition of Akmal Bari against alleged harassment by the police.

During the hearing, the Punjab government law officer stated that the police did not violate any court order. He said the petitioner was arrested in connection with an already registered case.

He maintained that the police cannot be barred from arresting a person nominated in a case.

He also submitted a reply on behalf of the inspector general of police, denying the charge of committing contempt of any judicial order.

On the other hand, Bari’s counsel pointed out that the court had ordered the police that the petitioner should not be harassed, but the orders were not followed.

He said a trial court had already discharged Bari from all three cases against him.

Advocate Khosa argued that the police, acting on political motives, also seized the petitioner’s vehicle, which amounts to a clear violation of court orders.

He asked the court to initiate contempt proceedings against those responsible for disregarding the judicial orders.

After hearing the arguments, the judge reserved the verdict on the contempt petition.

Published in Dawn, June 11th, 2025