Law:

Section:

Supreme Court Rules, 1956 ---- O. XXVI Review Order XXVI of Supreme Court Rules confined to correction of error apparent on face of record No error appearing on face of record Contention regarding doctor's opinion having not been correctly reflected in factually incorrect Other matters canvassed duly considered in hence, not liable to be reagitated in review Petition besides being barred by 16 days, for which no explanation furnished; having also nothing to commend itself on merits Legal sentence having been awarded, question, held, cannot be reopened in review. [Review]. ORDER MUHAMMAD AFZAL CHEEMA, J. In this petition Muhammad Sarfraz petitioner seeks review of this Court's judgment dated 14 11 1974 by which leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court confirming the sentence of death awarded to him on conviction on charge of murder was refused. Having heard the learned counsel quite at length, we are satisfied the besides being barred by 16 days, of which no explanation whatever has beep furnished, the review petition has nothing to commend itself on merits within the limited scope of Order XXVI of the Supreme Court Rules which is only confined to the correction of an error apparent on the face of the record. Learned counsel in vain tried to point out that in paragraph 8 of the judgment which dealt with the question of punishment alone, the doctor's opinion had not been correctly reflected. This is…

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