| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2016 SLG 2395 2016 SLD 2395 2016 PLD 629 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No. 1243 of 2016, decided on 30th May, 2016.
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE AND RAJA SHAHID MEHMOOD ABBASI, JUSTICE
Inam-ur-Rahman and Muhammad Wasif Khan for Petitioner.
Writ Petition No. 1243 of 2016, decided on 30th May, 2016.
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, JUSTICE AND RAJA SHAHID MEHMOOD ABBASI, JUSTICE
Inam-ur-Rahman and Muhammad Wasif Khan for Petitioner.
MUHAMMAD FARHAN KHAN
VS
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN AND another
Law:
Section:
Pakistan Army Act (XXXIX of 1952)--------- ----------S. 80(3)---------Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S.7---------Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Chap. II [Ss.6 to 27] & Chap.XV [Ss.177 to 199-B]---------Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---------Constitutional petition---------"Act of terrorism"---------Territorial jurisdiction of High Court---------'Dominant purpose' of filing constitutional petition---------Relevance---------Judicial review---------Scope---------Field General Court Martial, convened at 'Karachi', convicted the petitioner/accused and sentenced him to punishments, including death penalty---------Court of Appeal at 'Rawalpindi' rejected the appeal against the same, and the mercy petition filed against the same before the Chief of Army Staff had met the same fate---------Petitioner challenged the conviction and sentences through constitutional petition and contended that both Sindh High Court as well as Rawalpindi Bench of Lahore High Court had concurrent jurisdiction in the matter---------Validity---------Authority of the High Court to judicially review the vires of an act or proceedings taken in connection with the affairs of the Federation, within its territorial jurisdiction, could not be doubted; however, the constitutional arrangement contemplated under Art.199 of the Constitution were to be faithfully observed in order to uphold the principle of judicial comity and harmony---------In order to determine the question of territorial jurisdiction, the 'dominant purpose' behind recourse to law was to be taken into consideration---------'Dominant purpose' that brought the petitioner before High Court (Rawalpindi Bench) was repudiation of a originally rendered within the territorial limits of Sindh High Court and the proceedings drawn up subsequent thereto were in continuation thereof---------Impugned conviction and sentences awarded to the petitioner had been returned by a Tribunal convened in the Province of Sindh; therefore, mere affirmation of the same by a functionary at Rawalpindi would not take the petitioner's case out of the territorial jurisdiction of Sindh High Court to be concurrently dealt with by some other High Court,…
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