ISLAMABAD, Oct 10: A visibly surprised Supreme Court bench preferred on Thursday not to consider a civil miscellaneous application (CMA) instituted by the court office against Mohammad Azim Khan Afridi, Judge of Special CNS (Control of Narcotics Substance) Court, Peshawar, who appeared before it to face a contempt charge for using derogatory and scandalous language against members of the Judicial Commission (JC).

After consultation with other members of the bench, Justice Asif Saeed Khosa decided not to take up the application which, according to Mr Afridi, was initiat-ed by the SC`s human rights cell to malign him.

The entire material used in the application is based on the contents of a website belonging to Mr Afridi and considered by many as contemptuous.

The three-judge bench decided to confine to the contempt charge against Mr Afridi who was not confirmed as a permanent judge of the Islamabad High Court by the JC, a judicial body which appoints superior courtjudges.

The CNCjudge had on Sept27 summoned JC Secretary Dr Faqir Hussain, who is also registrar of the Supreme Court, in a case relating to narcotics business. The JCsecretary was required to appear before the CNS judge on Oct 3 to face allegations of his involvement with drug firm Saifco which, according to Mr Afridi, was culpable under the narcotics law.

The summoning notice was put before Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry on a note by the registrar.The chief justice decided to deal with the matter on the judicial side and directed to place it before the Supreme Court which had on Sept 27 suspended the summoning order of the CNS judge.

During the hearing of the contempt case on Thursday, Mr Afridi informed the three-judge bench that the CMA had been institutedwithout any prior notice to him.

Referring to the preliminary reply submitted by the special judge CNSinresponse to the contempt notice, Justice Khosa, who heads the bench, observed that its language reflected fury and bitterness.

`Some paragraphs of the reply are enough to independently proceed against the special judge in contempt,` the court observed.

However, it suggested that instead of displaying anger, the special judge should plead his case calmly without losing focus and consider engaging a professional lawyer to represent him. `It would have been better if you (Me Afridi)have not filed the reply,` the court observed.

But Azim Afridi insisted that the facts he wanted to highlight could never be emphasised by a professional lawyer and requested the apex court to order the high court to provide him a copy of an order he had issued as high court judge in a case which involved property tycoon Malik Riaz of Bahria Town. The attested copy of the order was not being given to him by the high court despite repeated requests, he said.

Justice Khosa observed that the court was extremely reluctant and embarrassed to proceed against a judicial officer and said unneces-sary issues would destroy the matter.

The court asked Mr Afridi to submit in three weeks a final reply and provide its copies to Attorney General Muneer A.

Malik because the court office might create problems as it was under the control of the same individual against whom he intended to proceed.

In his preliminary reply, Mr Afridi contended that the note of the registrar and orders passed thereon by the JC chairman in the capacity of the chief justice were void in law, illegal, unlawful, mala fide in nature and against the norms of justice and fair play.