| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1966 SLG 95 1966 SLD 95 1966 PLD 793 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 65 of 1965, decision dated: 14th July 1966
A. R. CORNELIUS, C.J., S. A. RAHMAN, FAZLEAKBAR, HAMOODUR RAHMAN AND MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, JJ
Aslam Riaz Hussain, Assistant Advocate General, West Pakistan, (Iftikharul Haq Khan, Advocate, Supreme Court, with him), instructed by Ijaz Ali, Attorney for Appellants. Nemo Nos. 25.
Criminal Appeal No. 65 of 1965, decision dated: 14th July 1966
A. R. CORNELIUS, C.J., S. A. RAHMAN, FAZLEAKBAR, HAMOODUR RAHMAN AND MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, JJ
Aslam Riaz Hussain, Assistant Advocate General, West Pakistan, (Iftikharul Haq Khan, Advocate, Supreme Court, with him), instructed by Ijaz Ali, Attorney for Appellants. Nemo Nos. 25.
(1) THE COMMISSIONER, SARGODHA DIVISION, AND (2) THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, SARGODHA
VS
KHIZAR HAYAT AND 5 OTHERS
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 58(3)-Leave to appeal-Granted by Supreme Court to consider question of law "of considerable general importance". Leave to appeal was granted by the Supreme Court to consider the question of law which was "of considerable general importance" namely, the validity of an order by the Commissioner passed on recommendation by the Deputy Commissioner under section 3 of the West Pakistan Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1963, withdrawing from the jurisdiction of the ordinary Courts and referring to a Tribunal under the said Act, the question of the guilt or innocence of persons against whom there were accusations of offences punishable under sections 363, 366, 368 and 376, P. P. C., in respect of a girl. (b) West Pakistan Criminal Law (Amendment) Act (VII of 1963), S. 3 read with First Schedule-Accused charged with offences some of which mentioned in First Schedule and others not--Whether Commissioner empowered to refer and if so which offences to Tribunal-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 363, 366, 368 & 376 - Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 403Application of principles of autre fois convict and autre fois acquit. Held, that the First Schedule is not framed on a basis of categories, but is to be treated as an enumeration ad hoc of the particular offences which the West Pakistan Legislature has directed should be referable by the Commissioner under section 3 to a Tribunal. The simple question in such a case was to decide whether the order (of reference) was valid in whole or in part and if only in part, which part of the order should be quashed. The offences which were being referred to the Tribunal for trial by the Commissioner's order were separately stated, and were to be treated prima facie as four references in respect of four separate offences. No difficulty need have been felt in ascertaining which of the references was sustainable in law and which was not so sustainable. Viewed in that simple light and bearing in mind that the First Schedule of the Act is not formulated on the basis of categories of offences, but enumerates specific offences in terms of sections contained in the Penal Code, it should have been…
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