Case Details

Citation(s)
2018 SLG 2641 2018 SLD 2641 2018 PLD 258

I.C.A. No. 359 of 2016 in W.P. No. 1611 of 2016, decision Dated: 17-05-2018, hearing Date : 28-09-2017.
ATHAR MINALLAH, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Malik Qamar Afzal and Barrister Masroor Shah
Respondent(s) by: Khawaja Muhammad Imtiaz, Deputy Attorney General

MUHAMMAD SHAHID

VS

FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY MINISTRY OF INTERIOR, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD AND ANOTHER

Law: Extradition Act, 1972

Section: 4,5,6,7,8

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 15,199

(a) Extradition Act (XXI of 1972) --- ----Ss. 4 & 8---Extradition proceedings---Non-treaty State---Order of Magisterial enquiry---Government of foreign country (United Kingdom), made a request to Pakistan for the appellant's extradition for his trial on the charge of murdering eight persons in the foreign country---Appellant was arrested in Pakistan, and the enquiry Magistrate found that there was a prima facie case against the appellant warranting his extradition to the foreign country under the provisions of the Extradition Act, 1972---Appellant challenged said order by way of Constitutional petition before the High Court, which was dismissed---Held, that an extradition treaty had not been executed between Pakistan and the foreign country in question (United Kingdom)---When there was no extradition treaty between Pakistan and the foreign State, the provisions of the Extradition Act, 1972 could be made applicable for the return of persons to such a non-treaty State provided the requirements of S. 4 of the Extradition Act, 1972 were fulfilled---In the present case, the enquiry Magistrate requested the Ministry of Interior to issue a notification under S. 4 of the Extradition Act, 1972 along with the nomination of an enquiry Magistrate to conduct an enquiry under S. 7 of the said Act---Ministry of Interior did issue a notification directing that the provisions of the said Act shall have effect in relation to the foreign country with respect to the extradition of the appellant who was wanted on charges of multiple murders---Although the enquiry Magistrate was appointed three days prior to the issuance of the notification under S. 4, but this by itself did not render the entire proceedings before the enquiry Magistrate, coram non judice or unlawful---At best, this was an irregularity which stood cured when the notification under S. 4 was issued---Number of documents were exhibited in the proceedings before the enquiry Magistrate, including the statement of the investigating officer of the case---In said statement, the appellant had been specifically implicated for conspiracy to commit arson with intent to endanger life and murder of eight…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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