| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1994 SLG 1515 1994 SLD 1515 1994 PLD 466 |
Lahore High Court
Intra-Court Appeal No: 359 of 1993, decided on 30th May,1994. dates of hearing: 1st, 2nd and 20th March; 4th and 6thApril, 1994.
MUNIR A. SHAIKH AND MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM, JJ
Ch. Muhammad Farooq, S.M. Zafar, Maqbool Elahi Malik, Syed Zahid Hussain, Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa and Asif Mahmood Chughtai for Appellant.
Respondent No. 1 in person. Mian A.S. Najam, A.G., Farooq Bedar, Addl. A.G., Sharif Hussain Bokhari and Muh
Intra-Court Appeal No: 359 of 1993, decided on 30th May,1994. dates of hearing: 1st, 2nd and 20th March; 4th and 6thApril, 1994.
MUNIR A. SHAIKH AND MALIK MUHAMMAD QAYYUM, JJ
Ch. Muhammad Farooq, S.M. Zafar, Maqbool Elahi Malik, Syed Zahid Hussain, Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa and Asif Mahmood Chughtai for Appellant.
Respondent No. 1 in person. Mian A.S. Najam, A.G., Farooq Bedar, Addl. A.G., Sharif Hussain Bokhari and Muh
MANZOOR AHMAD WATTOOvsABUL WAHABUL KHAIRI and another
Law:
Section:
(a) Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972)--- ----S. 3---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Intra-Court appeal--Interim orders passed in constitutional jurisdiction, so long as were not withdrawn or vacated were operative and should have been acted upon--Proper course was to approach the Division Bench for vacation of such interim orders---Contention that Intra-Court appeal against interim orders being not maintainable such interim orders were nullity and could be ignored was repelled. (b) Islamic Jurisprudence-- ----Administration of justice---No body was to be condemned unheard without providing him opportunity to defend himself. (c) Administration of justice--- ---- Expression of Court's own views about the prevailing evils in the country, widespread, general, non-specific condemnation of the established institutions was not to be made in the process of expressing such views nor individuals be targeted or feeling of despondency or helplessness aggravated. (d) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ----Arts. 199, 175(2) & 2A---Enforcement of Shariah Act (X,of 1991), Ss.4 & S---Suo motu constitutional jurisdiction of High Court ---Scope---Suo motu jurisdiction under Art. 199 of the Constitution cannot be exercised by the High Court in those matters regarding which express provisions have been enacted in the Constitution itself or the law has been made in regard thereto---Reliance of High Court on Ss.4 & 5 of the Shariat Application Act, 1991 and Art. 2A of the Constitution for assumption of suo motu jurisdiction was not correct as said provisions did not have the effect of conferring any jurisdiction but merely provided guidelines for deciding ;he matters properly brought before the Court under existing law. In the present case the main consideration on which the High Court decided to exercise suo motu jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution was that there was a vacuum or omission in the Constitution with regard to the accountability of the high State functionaries such as President, Prime Minister, Governor and Chief Minister. Etc ,, as there was no provision to compel them to account for their illegal acts before any forum, as…
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