Case Details

Citation(s)
1996 SLG 205 1996 SLD 205 1996 PLD 97
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal, Review Petition No.1 decided on 17-09-1995
SAIDUZZAMAM SIDDIQUI, FAZAL ILAHI KHAN AND MUKHTAR AHMAD, JUNEJO, JJ
S.M. Zafar, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record. Ch. M. Iqbal, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for the Complainant.

YAQOOB KHAN and ANOTHERS

VS

THE STATE

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 188

Law: Supreme Court Rules, 1980

Section: OXXVI,R.I

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)------- Art. 188 --- Supreme Court Rules, 1980, OXXVI, R.I --- Review --- Review of the of Supreme Court in a criminal case is permitted only on the ground of an error apparent on the face of the record and such error may be either of fact or of law. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto v. State PLD 1979 SC 741 ref. (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- ---- Art. 188 --- Supreme Court Rules, 1980, OXXVI, R.I --- Review --- Error apparent on the face of the record calling for review in a criminal case must not only be so apparent, but must also have a material bearing on the fate of the case --- Errors of inconsequential import do not call for review. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto v. State PLD 1979 SC 741 ref (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) ---- Ss.302/34 & 307/34 --- Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 188 --- Supreme Court Rules, 1980, OXXVI, R.I --- Review --- Contention raised in support of review application amounted to reappraisal and re-appreciation of evidence in the case which being outside the scope of review, the application was liable to be dismissed on such ground alone --- Witnesses who had identified the accused in the identification parade had stated in detail the role of each of the accused in the crime in their evidence before the Trial Court and as such their evidence had been rightly relied upon by the Courts below --- Evidence regarding extra­ judicial confession made by accused having been examined at length by the two Courts below and the conclusions reached by them having been accepted by Supreme Court, accused could not be permitted to ask for reappraisal of that evidence once again in the review proceedings --- Review petition was dismissed accordingly.--[Evidence]. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto v. State PLD 1979 SC 741; Saeed ur Rahman v. State 1980 SCMR 271; Khadim Hussain v. State 1985 SCMR,721; Lal Singh v. Crown ILR 51 Lah. 396 and 'Ghulam Rasul and 3 others v. The State 1988 SCMR 557 ref. ' Per Mukhtar Ahmad Junejo, J. Contra-- [pp. 105,106,1071 G, H, 1, J, K & L Khadim Hussain v. State 1985 SCMR 721; Lai Singh v. Crown ILR 51 Lah. 396; Ghulam Rasul and 3 others v. The State 1988 SCMR 557; Muhammad Amir alias Mushki and…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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