Syed Iftikhar Hussain Gillani, the counsel for Defence Secretary, urged to the bench to form a larger bench to hear the an Intra Court Appeal (ICA) against the contempt of court notice issued to his client by setting aside an adverse order in the current matter. To which, Chief Justice Chaudhry categorically stated that a counsel of the client had to make a request to constitute a larger bench after filing the ICA under the Supreme Court Rules, adding that an ICA didn't bar the court from adjudicating certain matters.
Gillani pleaded that under the law, filing an ICA contained sufficient ground to presume that an affectee had communicated to the court to constitute a larger bench to hear an ICA. Before indicting him, the bench provided a chance to Asif Yasim Malik during the proceedings to defend himself; to which, he submitted, "I do not feel guilty and claim for trial in the instant matter".
After making his statement, the Secretary Defence signed the charge-sheet whereas the bench asked Gillani to make a request for the constitution of a larger bench. The bench said in its short order that it found Secretary Defence guilty under Section 2B of the Contempt of Court Ordinance 2003 read with clause 3 of Article 204 of the Constitution of Pakistan. The Chief Justice ruled that a contempt notice was issued to Secretary Defence but his reply was found to be unsatisfactory.
During proceedings, the court directed Attorney General for Pakistan (AGP) Munir A Malik to prosecute Asif Yasin Malik in the instant matter; to which, he submitted that he intended to produce two judicial orders of January 3, 2013 and July 2, 2013 related to the case in hand. The court asked the AGP to file certified copies of the judicial orders during court's time so that the court could proceed further in the case.
During proceedings, the bench said that elected provincial governments and the Islamabad Capital Administration (ICT) were bound by the constitutional provisions to ensure transfer of power to the grass roots level according to the will of people. The Chief Justice said that provincial governments had given their consent to hold LB polls on November 27 and December 07, 2013. He further remarked that the federal government was authorise to hold LB polls in Cantonment Boards under the existing laws, but no progress had been made.
The bench observed that the Defence Ministry had told the court that LB polls would be held in 2012, adding that the Secretary Defence also pledged to hold LB elections in Cantonment areas before September 15, 2013. The court asked the Sindh government to hold LB polls on November 27 whereas the Punjab and Balochistan governments were directed to conduct LB elections on December 07. The court also sought reports from the ICT administration and Kyber Pakhtunkhwa in seven days in relation to LB polls before it adjourned the hearing of case till November 12.