Law:

Section:

(a) Criminal law--- ----Crime---'Aider and abettor' to the crime---'Beneficiary' of crime---Distinction---Person aiding or abetting another in an act was privy to the act itself but a beneficiary takes benefit or advantage of the act after the event and he may not necessarily be a party to the act itself. General (R.) Parvez Musharraf v. Nadeem Ahmed (Advocate) and another PLD 2014 SC 585 ref. (b) Criminal Law Amendment (Special Court) Act (XVII of 1976) --- ----Ss. 5(1) & 5(3)(a)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 202---High treason, offence of---Aiders and abettors---Trial before Special Court---Special Court, jurisdiction of---Scope--- Special Court ordering fresh investigation of the case for tracing role of appellant as an aider and abettor to the crime of high treason committed by accused---Leality---Fresh investigation into the offence of high treason by associating any person with the same laid within the prerogative of the Federal Government---Special Court constituted for trying persons accused of high treason or the High Court could not name any individual to be associated with any fresh investigation for determining his role as an aider or abettor to the offence---Moreover the Supreme Court and High Court in various s had fixed the entire and exclusive responsibility of committing high treason upon the accused---Supreme Court set aside all references to the appellant and two others in the impugned orders of Special Court and the High Court as suspects to be associated with any fresh investigation into the offence of high treason allegedly committed by accused. In the present case Special Court had been constituted for trial of accused, who had allegedly committed the offence of high treason by issuing a Proclamation of Emergency in the country. Special Court ordered reinvestigation of the matter to trace whether certain co-accused persons and present- appellant, who was the then Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, had aided and abetted the accused in committing offence of high treason. Constitutional petition filed by appellant against such order of Special Court was dismissed. Supreme Court observed that Federal Government had to…