Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 2999 2004 SLD 2999 2004 PLD 105
Balochistan High Court
Criminal Jail Appeal No .123 of 2000, Criminal Revision No. 139 of 2002, Dated: 15th August, 2003. heard on: 17th December, 2002.
AMANULLAH KHAN, JUSTICE FAZAL UR REHMAN, JUSTICE AND AKHTAR ZAMAN MALGHANI, JUSTICE
Muhammad Mohsin Javed for Petitioner, Rana Ehsan Rafique for Appellant. Malik Sultan Mehmood for the State. Rana Ehsan Rafique for
Respondent (in Criminal Revision No. 139 of 2000). Sardar Saleem Durrani for the State (in Criminal Jail Appeal No. 123

AMANULLAH AND others

VS

THE STATE AND others

Law:

Section:

Per Fazal Ur Rehman, Justice:---.---- (a) Jurisdiction---.---- ---.--- Question of jurisdiction being a question of law can always be raised by any party at any stage including the appeal---.---Court itself is required before proceeding with the case to examine whether it has jurisdiction in law to proceed or not---.---Merely because a party to the proceedings has not taken any objection to the jurisdiction out of ignorance or for want of proper advice, shall neither debar a party from taking such objection at the appellate stage nor the silence of a party or even waiver shall confer jurisdiction on a Court not vested in it in law---.---Question of jurisdiction goes to the very root of the case and renders the entire proceedings coram non judice thereby vitiating the same and making the illegal and void. NLR 1999 Criminal 122 and PLD 2003 Quetta 11 ref. (b) Administration of justice---.---- ---.--- Principle---.---Where law provides a procedure for doing a thing in u particular manner then that thing should be done in the prescribed manner and in no other manner or should not be done at all. Per Amanullah Khan, Justice:, Disagreeing With Fazal Ur Rehman, Justice: ¬Minority View- 2002 SCMR 203 and Munir Ahmed v. The State 2001 SCMR 56 ref. Per Akhtar Zaman Malghani, Justice:, Concurring With Fazal Ur Rehman, Justice: Majority view---.--- (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---.----- ---.--- S. 302---.---Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act (XV of 1975), S.4 & Sched.---.---Special Court having no jurisdiction, case remanded---.---Accused according to prosecution had allegedly committee the offence with a T.T. Pistol, but on the date when the offence was allegedly committed the amendment inserting semi automatic or automatic pistols commonly known as T.T. Pistols to the Sched. of the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975, was not in existence---.---Murder committed by T.T. Pistol, thus, was not triable by the, Special Court constituted under the said Act---.---Consent or acquiescence of the parties could not confer jurisdiction on a Court or Tribunal which totally lacked jurisdiction and the objection to the jurisdiction…
🔒
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