| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2015 SLG 2089 2015 SLD 2089 2015 SCMR 1071 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Appeals Nos. 718 and 1366 of 2007, decided on 1st April, 2015. (On appeal against the judgments dated 24-6-2005 and 19-4-2006 passed by the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench in Writ Petitions Nos. 1762 of 2005 and 919 of 2006)
AMIR HANI MUSLIM AND IJAZ AHMED CHAUDHRY, JJ
Col. (R) Muhammad Akram, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in C.A. 718 of 2007). Rao Naeem Hashim Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant (in C.A. 1366 of 2007). Sohail Mehmood, DAG for the State
Civil Appeals Nos. 718 and 1366 of 2007, decided on 1st April, 2015. (On appeal against the judgments dated 24-6-2005 and 19-4-2006 passed by the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench in Writ Petitions Nos. 1762 of 2005 and 919 of 2006)
AMIR HANI MUSLIM AND IJAZ AHMED CHAUDHRY, JJ
Col. (R) Muhammad Akram, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in C.A. 718 of 2007). Rao Naeem Hashim Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant (in C.A. 1366 of 2007). Sohail Mehmood, DAG for the State
EX-GUNNER MUHAMMAD MUSHTAQ and another
VS
SECRETARY MINISTRY OF DEFENCE through Chief of Army Staff and others
Law:
Section:
Pakistan Army Act (XXXIX of 1952)--- ----S. 59---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302---Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 10(1) & 199(5)---Qatl-i-amd---Field General Court Martial---Defence counsel of choice of accused---Accused persons were convicted by Field General Court Martial for committing murders of their colleagues---High Court in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction declined to interfere in conviction and sentence awarded by Field General Court Martial---Plea raised by accused persons was that they were not allowed to engage counsel of their own choice during trials---Validity---Accused persons were members of Armed Forces, therefore, writ could not have been issued by High Court against Field General Court Martial or against appellate authority which confirmed conviction and sentences in view of Art. 199(5) of the Constitution---Field General Court Martial was excluded from the definition of "person" in Art. 199(1)(i) of the Constitution---High Court rightly declined to press into service its constitutional jurisdiction in respect of accused persons, who were found guilty by competent forum---Supreme Court did not find any mala fide on the part of prosecution or authority---Neither order passed by Field General Court Martial was a case of no evidence nor evidence led by prosecution was insufficient---Sufficient evidence was available to prove guilt of accused persons---In absence of any mala fide on the part of prosecution, conviction and sentences awarded to accused by Field General Court Martial could not be stamped to be coram non judice---Accused persons were defended by defending officers and in constitutional petition before High Court by one of the accused it had been specifically mentioned that he could not afford engaging a counsel due to his sheer poverty--- Supreme Court declined to interfere in passed by High Court in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction---Appeal was dismissed. Ghulam Abbas Niazi v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 2009 SC 866; Shabbir Shah v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 1994 SC 738; Rana Muhammad Naveed v. Federation of Pakistan 2013 SCMR 596; Shahida Zahir Abbasi v. President of Pakistan PLD 1996 SC 632; Anwar Aziz v.…
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