Pakistan News

SC to indict Nehal Hashmi in contempt case on March 26

ISLAMABAD  – The Supreme Court of Pakistan has decided to indict Nehal Hashmi for committing contempt of court on 26 March.

Hearing case against Nehal Hashmi for abusing the judges immediately after serving one month sentence for the same crime, the apex court had served him contempt notice.

In response to the notice, Nehal Hashmi told the court that whatever he had said in the video, had been the words used by prisoners in the jail as he never talks in high voice with anyone. He said that he had been mentally upset and only repeated what he had heard in the prison.

On February 28, disgraced Senator Nehal Hashmi was released from Adiala Jail after he completed his incarceration sentence of a month in contempt of court case.

Hashmi was sentenced to one-month in prison with a fine worth Rs 50,000 in a suo moto notice taken by CJP after he delivered a tirade against judges and members of Panamagate Joint Investigation Team (JIT) for holding PML-N founder Nawaz Sharif accountable in a corruption probe.

The lawmaker, whose PML-N membership was revoked soon after the fiery speech, was banned to hold any public office for a period of five years by the top court.

Hashmi claimed that he was subjected to vengeance. He complained that he was not given his due right to appeal against the sentence.

The senator accused that National Accountability Bureau (NAB) is the most corrupt institution of Pakistan and that half of the funds looted in the country would be recovered if search operations are conducted in houses of department’s officials.

Statement of Hashmi concerning NAB has come at a time when the bureau is pursuing corruption references against former premier Nawaz Sharif, his daughter Maryam Nawaz and son-in-law Catp (r) Safdar

PM Imran warns parliamentarians against interfering with administration
CJP warns action against ‘anyone’ protecting Rao Anwar from arrest
PTI vs PMLN: Mind boggling number games to win the race to rule Punjab

Leave Your Reply