| Citation(s) |
| 1999 SLG 41 1999 SLD 41 = 1999 MLD 268 |
Civil Appeal No. 66 of 1998, decided on 11th July, 1998.
Sardar Said Muhammad Khan, C.J. and Muhammad Yunus Surakhvi, J
AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR through Chief Secretary and 3 others---Appellants'
VERSUS
GENUINE RIGHTS COMMISSION, AZAD JAMMU AND KASHMIR and 7 others---Respondents/Pro Forma Respondents
SARDAR SAID MUHAMMAD KHAN, C.J.---This appeal has been directed against the judgment of the High Court dated 22-4-1998, whereby accepting three separate writ petitions filed by the respondents, herein, the establishment of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Shariat Court (hereinafter shall he called Shariat Court) and the provision of certain statutes which empowered it to exercise various kinds of jurisdictions. were held violative of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act, 1974 , (hereinafter shall be called the Constitution Act); certain directions were also given to the appellants, herein. In writ petition entitled Ghulam Mustafa Mughal v. Azad Government and others (Writ Petition No.387 of 1997 instituted on 8-9-1997), it was contended that under the Constitution Act, the Supreme Court and the High Court were established under sections 12 and 43 respectively. The other Courts can also be established under section 46 of the Constitution Act and similar administrative Courts and tribunals can be constituted under section 47 of the said Act. All other Courts which have been envisaged under section 46 of the Constitution Act can be established only under the supervision and control of the High Court and there is no concept of the constitution of any other Court which is not under the supervision and the control of the High Court. Thus, it was averred that the establishment of the Shariat Court independent of the High Court under the Act known as The Azad Jammu and Kashmir Shariat Court Act, 1993, (hereinafter shall be called the Shariat Court Act) and certain provisions of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Islami (Tazeerati) Qawaneen Nifaz Act, 1974 ( hereinafter shall be called the Islamic Penal Laws Act) and that of the Hudood Acts and Ordinances which invested the Shariat Court with the powers to hear appeals and revisions etc. against the orders of District Criminal Courts and the Tehsil Criminal Courts, offend against the provisions of the Constitution Act, because the said Courts were not under the supervision and control of the High Court and creation of the said Courts is tantamount to establish a parallel judicial system in the State, which isβ¦
π
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register