ORDER
Ab. Qadir Parray, J.
1. Heard the petitioner in person.
2. This petition for initiation of contempt proceedings is misconceived as because the petitioner seeks initiation of contempt proceedings against a lawyer who is alleged to have given advice to his clients, directing them not to implement the orders of the court, thereby the petitioner wants to impress upon this court that it is the wrong advice being tendered by learned counsel for the respondents that the respondents are not implementing the orders of this court passed on number of occasions in different matters and to substantiate his submissions, the petitioner has placed on record a communication, wherein the opinion tendered by Mr. Anil Bhan to his clients is being brought on record.
3. The communication has been produced by the petitioner when it is neither addressed to him nor it has been forwarded to him by the respondents. Admittedly the communication made by the counsel to his client and client to his counsel is a privileged communication and is not admissible in evidence as per the provisions of Evidence Act.
4. Be that as it may be, but in ease the defendants are not implementing the court orders in letter and spirit, the lawyer is not to be proceeded in contempt. Lawyer’s role is that of an advisor and he has no other function. He is only to tender advice to his client. It is for the clients to admit that advice or to defy that. In case respondents have not implemented the orders of the court in letter and spirit, it is the person of the respondents who are to be arrayed as parties and against whom contempt if any, is made out, is to be initiated and the statement of fact is to be asked from them as to why they are not implementing the orders of the court and what is the impediment in not implementing the court orders.
5. Lawyer in person is not to be proceeded for non-implementation of the court orders not to speak of asking him to file statement of facts and that will be only an exercise in futility. Whether Mr. Bhan has tendered right or wrong advice, that is for his clients to judge. In case his clients feel that the advice tendered to them is not in accordance with law, they have the option to engage services of a person who would give them advice as per their assessments or approach to the problem. Advice is an advice. A person has two options, to abide the advice or the defy the same. But it docs not fall within the mischief of contempt of court.
6. For the foregoing reasons, this petition is dismissed in limine.