| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 1172 2004 SLD 1172 2004 SCMR 1348 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Review Petition No. 29 of 2003, decision dated: 1st April, 2004.(On appeal from the judgment, dated 19-9-2003 of this Court passed in Criminal Appeals Nos. 321 and 322 of 2001)
NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, C.J., JAVED IQBAL AND ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, JJ
M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Muhammad Akram, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondent
Criminal Review Petition No. 29 of 2003, decision dated: 1st April, 2004.(On appeal from the judgment, dated 19-9-2003 of this Court passed in Criminal Appeals Nos. 321 and 322 of 2001)
NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, C.J., JAVED IQBAL AND ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, JJ
M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Muhammad Akram, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondent
MUHAMMAD AFZAL
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)----S. 302(b)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.188---Review petition---Maintainability---Scope---Points now raised on behalf of the accused had been considered thoroughly and repelled as discussed in the impugned ---Review was not meant for rehearing of the matter---Impugned did not call for any interference---Review Petition was dismissed accordingly. (b) Constitution or Pakistan (1973)--- ----Art. 188---Review of s or orders by Supreme Court--¬Scope---Review is not meant for rehearing of the matter. JUDGMENT NAZIM HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI, C.J.---Petitioner, Muhammad Afzal, seeks review of this Court's judgment, dated 19-9-2003 delivered in Criminal Appeals Nos. 321 and 322 of 2001, which were dismissed with the following observations:--- " 12. In view of unimpeachable evidence of the prosecution in the shape of ocular account, motive, corroborative evidence and medical evidence, Mr. Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, learned Advocate Supreme Court appearing for the appellant, at the outset stated that he would not challenge the conviction; but only submitted that, under the circumstances, death penalty could not be awarded to the appellant. According to him, the appellant on the day of occurrence was minor and it being so the death penalty was unjustified. He submitted that according to birth certificate issued by concerned union council, the date of birth of the appellant is 17-11-1976, as such, he was child/minor at the time of commission of the offence, within the meaning of Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000 and in view of provisions of sections 299/306, P.P.C. death sentence could not be awarded. Above plea for lesser punishment was neither raised before trial Court nor before High Court nor there is sufficient material on record to…
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