| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 2923 2004 SLD 2923 2004 PLD 911 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No. 463-L of 2004, decided on 3rd August, 2004. (On appeal from the judgment/order dated 29-6-2004 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore in Cr. Revision No. 204 of 2003).
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHARY, AND M. JAVED BUTTAR, JJ
Rao Munawar Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Haji Muhammad Rafi Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Muhammad Sohail Dar, A.A.G. and Mian Ghulam Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents. Muhammad Ameen Javed, Advocate Supreme Court for the
Criminal Petition No. 463-L of 2004, decided on 3rd August, 2004. (On appeal from the judgment/order dated 29-6-2004 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore in Cr. Revision No. 204 of 2003).
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHARY, AND M. JAVED BUTTAR, JJ
Rao Munawar Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Haji Muhammad Rafi Siddiqui, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Muhammad Sohail Dar, A.A.G. and Mian Ghulam Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondents. Muhammad Ameen Javed, Advocate Supreme Court for the
MUHAMMAD ANWAR er
VS
SAEED AKHTAR and others
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.374-----High Court, after having disposed of murder reference and criminal appeal had become functus officio and had no jurisdiction to clarify or interpret the of the Supreme Court, because the passed by the High Court had merged in the of Supreme Court, whereby appeal filed by the party had been dismissed and review had also met the same fate. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 302(b)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts.185(3) & 187---Supreme Court Rules 1980, O.XXXIII, R.6---Accused, in the present case was found guilty under S.302, P.P.C. on two counts qua the murder of two persons and was sentenced to death on each count by way of Qisas--Judgment of Trial Court had been maintained up to the Supreme Court---High Court, in disposing of a revision petition by the son of one of the deceased contending that he had not compromised with the accused, held that sentence of death on each count by way of Qisas was in fact the sentence under Ta'zir---Contention of the petitioner was that after ultimate decision by the Supreme Court, High Court had no jurisdiction to treat the conviction of the accused as Ta'zir and not as Qisas---Validity---Held, High Court had become functus officio and had no jurisdiction to clarify or interpret the of Supreme Court because of the High Court had merged in the of the Supreme Court whereby the appeal against the of the High Court had been dismissed--Supreme Court observed that as now the matter was before the Supreme Court for examination, therefore keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and having taken into consideration the evidence, available on record, produced by the prosecution to substantiate accusation against the accused, the accused was found guilty for the commission of the offence under S.302(b), P.P.C. on two counts qua the murder of two persons, he was sentenced to death on each count by way of Ta'zir and not Qisas and such correction/classification was permissible to do complete justice in view of law laid down by Supreme Court in Khalil-uz-Zaman v. Supreme Appellate Court Lahore and 4 others PLD 1994…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492