| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2024 SLG 5301 2024 SLD 5301 = 2024 PLC 957 |
Civil Petition No.3644 of 2020, decided on 24th April, 2024. (Against order dated 27.10.2020 passed by the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi in W.P. No.3764 of 2019). Date of hearing: 24th April, 2024
Present: Munib Akhtar, Ayesha A. Malik and Shahid Waheed, JJ
Agha Muhammad Ali, Advocate Supreme Court and Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
Respondent No.1: (In person). Sanaullah Zahid, Additional Advocate General Punjab with Muhammad Shahid Rana, Director (S.W.) Rawalpindi for
Respondents Nos. 2-4.
Raja TANVEER SAFDAR
VERSUS
Mrs. TEHMINA YASMEEN and others
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 13(a)
(a) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Art. 13(a)---Protection against double punishment---Double jeopardy---Scope---Protection given under Article 13(a) of the Constitution is against prosecution and punishment, which means the trial and its proceedings followed by a conviction---If the first prosecution results in an acquittal, so far as Article 13(a) of the Constitution is concerned, the second prosecution is not prohibited---Concept of double jeopardy essentially means that a person cannot be tried multiple times for the same offence on which there is a conviction based on the same set of facts as they should not be put in peril twice---It is based on the rule of conclusiveness and finality which requires that once a court has taken cognizance of an offence, tried a person and convicted them, then for the same offence that person cannot be tried again---So, the basic question is that in the case of double jeopardy, the second trial should be on the same set of facts of the first trial which resulted in a conviction for the same offence, which would require the same evidence before the court---Basically, this means that the case has to be the same as the one that has already resulted in a conviction but if the proceedings are different in substance and law then it will not be a case of double jeopardy.
Muhammad Ashraf v. The State 1995 SCMR 626; Sohail Ahmad v. Government of Pakistan 2022 SCMR 1387; Muhammad Tufail v. Assistant Commissioner/Collector 1989 SCMR 316 and Lord Hailsham, 9 Halsbury's Laws of England (2nd ed. 1931), 152-153, Para [212] ref.
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