| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1997 SLG 1238 1997 SLD 1238 = 1997 PLD 69 |
Quetta High Court
Criminal Appeals Nos.230, 245, 248, 253 to 255, 258, 260, 263, 264, 270 to 272, 275. 284, 294, 297 to 316 and 320 of 1996, decided on 23rd December, 1996.
Presented By: Before Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhary and Javed Iqbal, JJ
Dy. A.-G and A.-G. for the State (in Cr1.A. No.230 of 1996). Salahuddin Mengal (in Crl.A. No.245 of 1996). Dy. A.-G and A.-G. for the State (in Crl.A. No.245 of 1996). Riaz Ahmed for Petitioner (in Crl. A. No.248 of 1996) Dy. A.-G and A.-G. for the State (in Cr1.A. No.248 of 1996). Kamran Murtaza for Petitioner (In Crl. A. No.253 of 1996). Dy. A.-G and A.-G. for the State (in Cr1.A. No.253 of 1996).
Criminal Appeals Nos.230, 245, 248, 253 to 255, 258, 260, 263, 264, 270 to 272, 275. 284, 294, 297 to 316 and 320 of 1996, decided on 23rd December, 1996.
Presented By: Before Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhary and Javed Iqbal, JJ
Dy. A.-G and A.-G. for the State (in Cr1.A. No.230 of 1996). Salahuddin Mengal (in Crl.A. No.245 of 1996). Dy. A.-G and A.-G. for the State (in Crl.A. No.245 of 1996). Riaz Ahmed for Petitioner (in Crl. A. No.248 of 1996) Dy. A.-G and A.-G. for the State (in Cr1.A. No.248 of 1996). Kamran Murtaza for Petitioner (In Crl. A. No.253 of 1996). Dy. A.-G and A.-G. for the State (in Cr1.A. No.253 of 1996).
KHUDAI DAD alias MAMA and others---Applicants.
VERSUS
THE STATE and others---Respondents.
Law: Constitution of Pakistan 1973
Section: 45
Law: Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979
Section:
Law: Control of Narcotic Substances Ordinance, 1995
Section:
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ----Arts. 203-D, 203-F & 203-GG ---Decision of Federal Shariat Court when binding on High Court and its subordinate Courts---Order having been passed in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction conferred upon Federal Shariat Court under Art. 203-D subject to Art.203-F of the Constitution shall have binding effect under Art.203-GG of the Constitution on. High Court and its subordinate Courts declaring any law repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam as laid down in Holy Qur'an and Sunnah anti any other order not covered by the said Articles of the Constitution would have no such binding effect.--[Precedent]. PLD 1982 FSC 11; PLD 1992 FSC 286; PLD 1995 Kar. 459 and 1995 CLC 51 ref. Interpretation of statutes--- ---- Repeal of earlier law---Law having not been expressly repealed cannot be inferred to have been impliedly repealed, unless it is shown that the former and the latter laws are inconsistent and they cannot co-exist. Crawford's Interpretation of Laws, para. 137 ref. Interpretation of statutes--- ----Preamble---Object---Preamble reveals the intention of Legislature---Preamble of statute can always be looked into to explore the intention of the law givers. Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979)-- ----Arts. 3 & 4---Control of Narcotic Substances Ordinance (VI of 1995), Ss. 6, 7, 8 & 9---Repeal by implication---When not permissible---Articles 3 & 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 and Ss. 6, 7, 8 & 9 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Ordinance, 1995 being not inconsistent to each other, former law cannot be inferred to have been impliedly repealed by the latter law. Crawford's Interpretation of Laws, para. 137 and PLD 1964 SC 473 ref. Interpretation of statutes--- ---- Law altered during pendency of an action---Effect---When the law is altered during the pendency of an action, the rights of the parties are decided according to the law as it existed when the action was begun unless the new statute shows a clear intention to vary such rights. Crawford's Interpretation of Laws, para.296 and PLD 1965 SC 681 ref. Appeal--- ---- Lower Court's…