• Friday, December 6, 2019

Pakistan Supreme Court updates

Discussion in 'Insaf - Justice' started by ghazi52, Jul 27, 2019.

  1. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    Fake testimony biggest impediment in justice system: CJP Khosa
    27 July,2019

    [​IMG]

    Model courts are playing their role for speedy justice: CJP

    LAHORE (Dunya News) – Chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) Asif Saeed Khosa said fake testimonies are the biggest hurdle to the justice system. He said it is the basic right of every citizen to get justice from the courts.

    Addressing a workshop at Judicial Academy, he said the eye witness give wrong testimony in murder cases. He said we are providing standard education to young lawyers and to investigators.

    CJP said the model courts are playing their role for speedy justice. He said the burden on High Courts have reduced after the establishment of model courts.

    Talking about police reforms, the top judge said a committee of 9 judges has been formed to introduce reforms in police system. He said the committee would work for better image of police in the eyes of public. He said police have solved 71000 complaints in three months.

    He said a modern research center would be established to help judges in provision of speedy justice. He said facility of voice typing would also be provided to judges.

    He said special courts would be established to hear cases related to gender discrimination.
     
  2. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    The Supreme Court on Monday ordered the formation of a larger bench to determine the exact length for a life sentence.

    A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, took notice of the issue while hearing a petition to reduce a convict's life sentence into half.

    Haroonul Rashid was sentenced to life imprisonment 12 times in 12 different cases of murder. He has been in jail since 1997 and has served a 22-year sentence, Rashid's lawyer told the court while adding that the court had allowed for the 12 sentences to be served concurrently.

    "Is it not a misconception that a life sentence spans over 25 years?" the chief justice asked.
    "When we don't know how long a person is going to live, how can we halve a life sentence," he added.

    "I had been waiting for a long time for a case where we could determine the span of a life sentence. In a jail sentence, days and nights are both counted. In this manner, a convict comes out within five years.

    "It is time that we clear up these major misconceptions and figure out the span of a life sentence. It is a matter of public interest."

    The court issued notices to the attorney general, provincial advocate generals and prosecutor general. The court also ordered for the registrar office to fix the matter for hearing in the first week of October.

    Last month, the chief justice had showed his intent reexamining the life imprisonment law "at an appropriate time".

    This is not the first time that the judiciary has made such observations. In 2004, a five-member bench heard as many as 62 appeals that urged the apex court to reinstate death penalty for convicts whose capital punishments were commuted into life imprisonment leading to their release on the basis of remission in their imprisonment periods.

    Section 57 of the Pakistan Penal Code, Fractions of terms of punishment, says: "In calculating fractions of terms of punishment, imprisonment for life shall be reckoned as equivalent to imprisonment for twenty-five years."

    The Supreme Court, however, had observed in 2004 that the provisions of the aforementioned section, which reckon 25-year imprisonment as transportation for life, only stipulate the calculation of the punishment term which is necessary because certain offences are a fraction of the term of imprisonment prescribed for other offences.
     
  3. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    SC accepts review petition seeking Sindh CM Murad Ali Shah's disqualification
    Haseeb Bhatti
    August 06, 2019


    [​IMG]
    Petitioner claims Shah owned an iqama and had Canadian nationality when he submitted nomination papers for 2013 elections. — DawnNewsTV/File
    The Supreme Court of Pakistan on Tuesday accepted for hearing a review petition for the disqualification of Sindh Chief Minister Murad Ali Shah.

    A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Azmat Saeed, sent Shah a notice to appear before the court in the case.

    Petitioner Roshan Ali Buriro's lawyer Hamid Khan argued that Shah gave a false declaration while submitting his qualification papers for the 2013 election and that he was holding an iqama and dual nationality at the time.

    In January, Supreme Court threw out Buriro's application seeking Shah's disqualification on the grounds that the petitioner had failed to produce enough arguments to satisfy the court.

    At the time, Justice Umer Ata Bandial had pointed out that the Sindh chief minister had renounced his Canadian citizenship in 2013, therefore, he could not be disqualified on those grounds.

    The bench had further said that the petitioner's intent was questionable as he was a political opponent of Shah.

    "The prima facie [grounds for] disqualification are not clear in this case," Justice Bandial had said at the time.

    "Shah did not submit any paperwork showing that he had given up his Canadian nationality and the court disqualified him on this basis," the lawyer told the court during Tuesday's maintainability hearing.

    During the hearing, Justice Bandial — who was part of the SC bench that heard the original petition — pointed out that a court declaration regarding Article 62 is required in the matter. Upon this, Justice Saeed said that a court order suffices as a court declaration.

    "Every electoral candidate provides a declaration to the returning officer and Article 62(1)(f) of the constitution applies to any declarations that are not based on the truth," Justice Saeed said, accepting the review petition.
     
  4. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    Nawaz disqualified for concealing assets, submitting fake testimony: SC



    [​IMG]

    ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Saturday said former premier Nawaz Sharif was disqualified for not declaring assets and submitting a fake testimony.

    The apex court observed that non-declaration of assets in nomination forms had made the system and people corrupt. Announcing its verdict on disqualification of a member assembly, the Supreme Court said any ease given to members in this regard would be harmful.

    The court said the results of non-declaration of assets would not be good. It further said actionable steps must be taken to tackle this situation, adding that PML-N leader Muhammad Nawaz Sharif had concealed assets of Capital FZE in 2013 nomination forms. In the verdict, the court said public representatives were not honest according to Article 62-1F of the Constitution and the court could not ignore the concealing of assets and submitting fake testimony.
     
  5. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    'No shortcuts in the path of justice,' says SC's Justice Azmat Saeed in farewell speech
    August 27, 2019

    [​IMG]

    Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed (L), last month took oath as acting chief justice of Pakistan. — INP/File
    A full-court reference was held on Tuesday at the Supreme Court in honour of Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed, who has reached superannuation.

    Headed by Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, the ceremony was attended by senior judges and lawyers including the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association and vice-chairman of the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC).

    In his farewell speech at the reference, Justice Saeed highlighted the importance of an independent judiciary, saying "The justice system of Pakistan has been established after a lot of hard work, brick-by-brick."

    "I hope no shortcuts will come in the way of [provision of] justice," he added.

    Justice Saeed also expressed the hope that his fellow judges will remain aware of the difference between "judicial anarchy and justice".

    He said it was no less than an honour for him to serve the people by becoming a part of the judiciary. "Everyone should play their part for the provision of justice," the judge advised.

    Chief Justice Khosa in his remarks termed Justice Saeed an asset of the superior judiciary, saying it had been his honour to have worked with him.

    He noted that the outgoing judge had penned several historic verdicts and untangled several uncertain matters during his time at the top court.

    "Justice Saeed's belief in the rule of law and Constitution is evident from his judgements," Justice Khosa remarked.

    Lauding Justice Saeed's services for the judiciary, Attorney General Anwar Mansoor Khan noted that the judge had written important verdicts concerning military courts and the right to a fair trial.

    "The judiciary is losing a capable judge today," he said, pay respect to Justice Saeed on behalf of the federal government.

    PBC vice chairman Syed Amjad Shah in his address accused the government of using tactics to suppress "dissenting voices".

    "Should institutions be allowed to exceed their authority? Are the parliament and courts functioning independently?" he asked.

    He said the Supreme Court should bind every institution to stay within its constitutional limits, adding that interference in political matters damages the reputation of the judiciary.

    The PBC vice chairman also expressed concern at what he said was "out-of-turn hearing" of references against certain superior court judges.

    He said he hoped a full-court bench of the SC will hear the applications against the presidential reference filed against Justice Qazi Faez Isa.

    In brief: Justice Saeed's career

    Justice Saeed was first enrolled as an advocate of the High Court of Lahore (LHC) in 1980 and was promoted to advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan the subsequent year. Justice Saeed also served as special prosecutor of the Ehtesab Bureau in 1997 and was a member of the legal team prosecuting many high profile cases at the LHC.

    He served as special prosecutor National Accountability Bureau in 2001. Justice Saeed was appointed as an additional Judge of the LHC in 2004. In 2012, he was elevated as Judge of the Supreme Court of Pakistan.
     
  6. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    CJP cautions against perception of lopsided accountability

    September 11, 2019

    [​IMG]
    Chief Justice Pakistan (CJP) Justice Asif Saeed Khosa. PHOTO COURTESY: RADIO PAKISTAN

    ISLAMABAD: Chief Justice Pakistan (CJP) Justice Asif Saeed Khosa on Wednesday cautioned against the growing perception of ‘lopsided accountability’ and said such perceptions could be dangerous.

    Addressing a full-court ceremony on Wednesday marking the new judicial year at the Supreme Court, he said: “We as a relevant organ of the state also feel that the growing perception that the process of accountability being pursued in the country at present is lopsided and is a part of political engineering is a dangerous perception…”


    The chief justice added that remedial steps need to be taken “urgently so that the process does not lose credibility”.

    “Recovery of stolen wealth of the citizenry is a noble cause and it must be legitimately and legally pursued where it is due but if in the process the constitutional and legal morality of the society and the recognised standards of fairness and impartiality are compromised then retrieval of the lost constitutional and legal morality may pose an even bigger challenge to the society at large in the days to come,” said the Justice Khosa.

    He also referred to bar associations concerned with receding political space in the governance of the state and stressed that “such concerns cannot be ignored”.

    “As an important and independent organ of the state responsible for safeguarding the constitutional ethos of the country we feel that such loss of political space in [the] governance of the state may not augur well for the future of the country as a constitutional democracy.”

    Commenting on reports regarding media censorship in the country, Justice Khosa said: “Voices [are] being raised about [the] muzzling of the print and electronic media and suppression of dissent are also disturbing. It must be appreciated by all concerned that a voice suppressed or an opinion curbed generates frustration, frustration gives rise to discontent and increasing discontent poses a serious threat to the democratic system itself.”

    “Constitutionally guaranteed rights of citizens ought never to be compromised for the sake of short-term political or governance advantages.”

    With regards to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC), the CJP elaborated that it “was mandated by the Constitution to inquire into conduct of judges of the superior judiciary and I must say that the job to be performed in that regard is the most unpleasant job that its chairman and members are to perform in their entire judicial careers. Nonetheless, it is a constitutional duty they cannot refuse to perform.”

    “The Constitution empowers the president to direct the council to inquire into the conduct of a judge and the council cannot disregard such a constitutionally mandated direction and it must inquire as directed. It, however, goes without saying that such a direction to inquire does not, and cannot, control the opinion to be formed by the Council after inquiring into the matter,” said Justice Khosa in a clear reference to the Supreme Court judge Qazi Faez Isa and the Sindh High Court (SHC) judge KK Agha case, facing presidential references for allegedly not disclosing foreign properties in their wealth statements.

    Justice Khosa also called out “a section of the society” for being unhappy that the apex court was slow in taking suo motu actions over issues where they was demanded.

    He said, “…a suo motu notice taken on a demand of somebody else may not be suo motu and would be a contradiction in terms. This court shall take suo motu notice of a matter only when it feels the necessity or utility for it and not when it is coaxed in that regard by outsiders”

    “Be that as it may, at present this Court is practising judicial activism of a different kind. Instead of judicial activism, it is practising active judicialism.”
     
  7. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    Supreme Court orders private schools to restore fee amount to that of Jan 2017
    September 13, 2019

    [​IMG]

    A three-member Supreme Court bench "struck down" any increase in fee charged by private schools since 2017.
    A three-judge Supreme Court bench on Friday struck down any increase in private schools' fee since 2017 in its verdict on appeals pertaining to exorbitant hikes by private institutions.

    In a 65-page verdict, the court said that private schools had "excessively increased fee since 2017 in violation of the law" and that the charges should be restored to what they were in January 2017 and the additional amount be "struck down".

    "It will be deemed that there was no increase in fee since 2017 and fees were frozen at the rates prevailing in January 2017," the ruling read.

    The verdict said that any increase in school fees must be in accordance with the laws and that any recalculation be made "using the fee prevailing in 2017 as the base fee". The recalculation method, the top court said, must be supervised by regulators and the amount charged must be "approved by them [and] shall be treated as the chargeable fee".

    The verdict also forbade the schools to recover "under any circumstances" the amounts that were reduced in accordance with the Supreme Court's 2018 ruling — which ordered a 20 per cent reduction in the fees charged by upscale private schools.

    "The regulators shall closely monitor the fee being charged by private schools to ensure strict compliance with the law and the rules/regulations. Complaint cells shall be set up to deal with complaints arising out of increase in fee in violation of the law/rules/regulations," the verdict read.

    The three-member bench, comprising Chief Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, Justice Ijazul Ahsan and Justice Faisal Arab, heard the appeals filed by parents of students as well as private schools.
     
  8. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    SC bans high courts from raising objections to trial courts' verdicts

    [​IMG]

    September 14, 2019

    The Supreme Court of Pakistan, in a striking verdict on Saturday, barred high courts from raising objections to trial courts’ judges and their verdicts.

    However, it maintained that in case of any reservation(s) or objections, the administrative committee could be approached in a written form, for taking any possible disciplinary action.

    The top court has further restricted high courts from summoning judges during an appeal of any case in the court.

    Thereby, the SCP has approved an appeal of Additional District and Sessions Judge Nusrat Yasmeen.

    The Supreme Court has directed the Peshawar High Court (PHC) to not include objections against Judge Nusrat Yaseem as part of his service record.

    Besides, the court has ordered to dispatch copies of the ruling to all judges of the high courts.
     
  9. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    September 18, 2019

    Garbage should be removed from different sites in Islamabad on an emergency basis, ruled the Supreme Court while hearing the Bani Gala encroachment case on Wednesday.

    The CDA chairperson and mayor have been ordered to submit progress reports in a month.

    Justice Umar Ata Bandial said that the authorities have displayed ‘bureaucratic behaviour’ in court. “We were told something and the reality was something else,” he observed.

    He remarked that a dumping site was shown only in documents, and that no designated location for the city's waste was being used to isolate trash from the city.

    The government needs to come up with cheap and effective solutions to solve different problems in the city, said Justice Ijazul Ahsan.

    On April 4, the top court came down hard on the CDA chairperson over Islamabad’s sanitation situation. The bench remarked that Islamabad has become dirtier than Karachi or Lahore.

    “The CDA has turned the Rawal Dam into a gutter. Islamabad has grown dirtier than Karachi and Lahore,” said Justice Gulzar Ahmed. “The civic agency is exclusively concerned with recreational points for the elite.”
     
  10. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    Man acquitted in blasphemy case after 18 years in prison

    September 26, 2019

    [​IMG]

    The Supreme Court on Wednesday acquitted a man who had been condemned to death in a blasphemy case in 2002 and had consequently remained behind bars for 18 years. — AFP/File
    ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court on Wednesday acquitted a man who had been condemned to death in a blasphemy case in 2002 and had consequently remained behind bars for 18 years.

    A three-judge bench, headed by Justice Sajjad Ali Shah, exonerated Wajih-ul-Hassan from blasphemy charges under Section 295-C (use of derogatory remarks, etc., in respect of the Holy Prophet [Peace Be Upon Him]) of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) for want of concrete evidence against him.

    The court observed that the prosecution had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the letters, which became the basis of blasphemy allegations against Mr Hassan, were actually written by him, and consequently rejected the case.

    Additional Prosecutor General (APG) of Punjab Mohammad Amjad Rafiq pleaded the case against Mr Hassan through a video link from Lahore.

    Elaborating, the APG told Dawn that the allegations stemmed from the letters the accused had allegedly written to a senior lawyer namely Ismail Qureshi after the latter succeeded in getting a favourable judgement from the Federal Shariat Court (FSC).

    The lawyer had sought amendments to the PPC by raising the plea that the government should be directed to delete the sentence of life imprisonment from the law and instead maintain the death penalty as the only punishment for committing the grave offence.

    Consequently, the FSC in 1991 ordered the government to bring amendments to the law by April 30, 1991, otherwise it would be deemed to have been amended by proposing only capital punishment for committing blasphemy.

    The APG said that the accused had written five letters to Advocate Qureshi in 1998 while using the name of Hassan Murshid Masih. “The first letter was burnt by the lawyer for being too sacrilegious, but he received a series of letters.

    “Later Mr Qureshi received another letter from Umar Nawaz Butt who told the lawyer that he knew the writer who had allegedly committed blasphemy, and revealed his real name with his mailing address and a copy of his national identity card. Mr Butt also said he had dispatched copies of the letter to the then prime minister and the then chief minister of Punjab.

    “Mr Qureshi approached Iqbal Town police station of Lahore’s Moon Market area to lodge an FIR against Mr Hassan. Initially the police showed reluctance by saying they would seek the opinion of the Ulema Board whether these letters fell under the purview of blasphemy or not.”

    According to the lawyer, finally the police registered the case against Mr Hassan under Section 295-C of the PPC, on the charge of committing blasphemy, on March 31, 1999 when Advocate Qureshi filed a petition in the Lahore High Court (LHC). The police then raided the residence of the accused in Kot Abdul Malik, Sheikhupura district.

    “On May 21, 2001, the accused confessed before Mohammad Waseem, the manager of a steel/iron factory where he worked, of having committed the crime,” the AGP said. Waseem and his friend Mohammad Naveed got Mr Hassan’s ‘extrajudicial confession’ on a paper and took him to the police station where he was arrested.

    On May 28, 2001, a handwriting expert, after examining handwriting specimen of the accused, said in his report that the writing of the accused closely matched with the letters in question.

    Accordingly, an additional district and sessions judge of Lahore convicted Mr Hassan and awarded him death sentence. The decision was later maintained by the Lahore High Court.

    However, the Supreme Court has acquitted Mr Hassan on the grounds that the ‘extra-judicial confession’ and corroboratory evidence — the handwriting expert’s report — were always considered weak evidence under the law and since there were no direct witness therefore the apex court had no option but to order release of the accused after exonerating him from all charges.

    Currently, the accused is imprisoned in Kot Lakhpath Jail, Lahore, since the trial court had sentenced him to death under Section 295-C of the PPC and 10-year jail term under Section 295-A of the PPC.

    While deciding the case of Aasia Bibi — a Christian lady facing death sentence on blasphemy charges — the apex court on Oct 31, 2018, had held that it was not for individuals or a gathering (mob) to decide whether any act falling within the purview of Section 295-C had been committed or not because it was the court’s mandate to make such decisions after conducting a fully qualified trial on the basis of credible evidence.

    “Presumption of innocence remains throughout the case until such time the prosecution on the evidence satisfies the court beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the offence alleged against him, the judgement says.

    “There cannot be a fair trial, which is itself the primary purpose of criminal jurisprudence, if the judges have not been able to clearly elucidate the rudimentary concept of the standard of proof that prosecution must meet in order to obtain a conviction,” the judgment says.
     
  11. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    October 01, 2019

    [​IMG]
    Parveen Rehman, a social worker who devoted her life to the development of the impoverished neighbourhoods across the country, was shot dead near her office in Orangi Town in 2013. — Jutice for Parween Rehman/File

    The Supreme Court on Tuesday, while hearing a case pertaining to the 2013 murder of social worker Parween Rehman, admonished law enforcement agencies, saying they seemed "helpless before land and water mafias".

    "This matter is turning into a mystery," remarked Justice Ijazul Ahsan, who was part of the bench. "Six years have gone by already, what are the law enforcement agencies doing?"

    The three-member bench, headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial, asked Babar Bakht Qureshi, who is heading the joint investigation team (JIT) probing the matter, about the findings of the case. Qureshi said that there were no major developments and urged the court to give the JIT more time to investigate. He told the bench that since the murder happened six years ago, the JIT could not obtain any data through geofencing.

    Justice Ahsan told Qureshi that the JIT had been constituted because law enforcement agencies were not doing their job.

    "What are law enforcement agencies doing since 2013? Are these mafias out of their reach?" asked Justice Ahsan.

    "Mafias have killed people who are involved in social work," said Justice Bandial.

    The court granted Qureshi two months to wrap up investigation and directed him to submit an interim report in three weeks.

    Read: JIT sees ‘land mafia’ behind Perween Rehman’s murder

    In June, it emerged that investigators were still trying to collect “basic forensic and circumstantial evidence” related to the murder as two joint investigation teams reportedly overlooked the basic things to resolve the mystery surrounding the high-profile killing.

    This disclosure came in an interim report filed in the Supreme Court, where the slain activist’s sister Aquila Ismail moved an application for reinvestigation of the case by the Federal Investigation Agency.

    Rehman, a social worker who devoted her life to the development of the impoverished neighbourhoods across the country, was shot dead near her office in Orangi Town in 2013.

    The very next day, police killed a Taliban operative named Qari Bilal in an encounter and claimed he was the murderer, resulting in a closure of the case.

    The Supreme Court of Pakistan in April 2014 ordered authorities to conduct a fresh probe into Parveen Rehman's murder after a judicial inquiry had revealed that police officers had manipulated the investigation.

    A JIT report in 2018 had explained three possible theories behind the motive — the work of TTP or the jihadi elements against the vision of Rehman; second, the illegal water and hydrant mafia in the city; and lastly, the organised crime groups involved in land-grabbing because she was striving to help residents of Goth Abad Schemes to secure their land rights.
     
  12. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    CJP questions why life sentence corresponds to maximum imprisonment of 25 years

    October 2, 2019

    [​IMG]
    Justice Asif Saeed Khosa. PHOTO: EXPRESS

    ISLAMABAD: The Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Asif Saeed Khosa on Wednesday questioned why life sentence corresponded to the maximum imprisonment of 25 years.

    A seven-judge bench of the Supreme Court led by the CJP resumed hearing of the case to determine the span of life imprisonment. The CJP said that it was matter of principles which will affect thousands of cases.

    “How life imprisonment can be fixed for 25 years in prison when the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) is silent on the matter?” the CJP questioned.

    Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) members Ahsan Bhoon and Azam Tarar appeared before the bench and stated that the bar wants to become a party to the case.

    However, the matter has been postponed as the petitioner requested to file a fresh plea in the case.

    Earlier in July, a three-judge bench, led by CJP, questioned whether life imprisonment meant imprisonment of a convict for his remaining biological life or anything shorter than that – and if so, whether different sentences of imprisonment for life passed in the same case or different cases were to run concurrently or consecutively.

    “The question has appeared to us to be a question of immense public importance affecting a larger number of cases in the country,” said CJP Khosa.

    Currently, the sentence of life imprisonment corresponds to a maximum imprisonment of 25 years, and a minimum of 15 years (per Rule 140 of the Pakistan Prison Rules 1978); after earning remissions as may be extended by the executive functionaries from time-to-time but subject to Section 401 CrPC, Rule 216 and Rule 218 of the Pakistan Prison Rules, 1978.

    The jail manual also provides for at least a 14-year substantive period for those sentenced to life imprisonment. Section 57 of the Criminal Procedure Code stipulates that life imprisonment will be 25 years.

    The CJP had hinted at interpreting the ambiguity of the life sentence while hearing review appeal of a death row convict, Abdul Qayyum. During the hearing, Justice Khosa had remarked that the current interpretation of life imprisonment law was flawed.

    Referring to judicial practice in India, the chief justice remarked that life sentences in India are given after specifying the period of imprisonment.
     
  13. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    Supreme Court told man give due property to sisters

    The Supreme Court of Pakistan Wednesday ordered a man to provide due share in property to his two sisters.

    The apex court conducted the hearing of a case related to the distribution of property which led to a dispute among Abdul Ghafoor, a resident of Peshawar, and his two sisters.

    As the hearing went underway, Justice Qazi Faez Isa remarked that the parties have agreed for the distribution of the property. Justice Isa rejected to hear any other plea in the case until the implementation of the previous orders.

    Justice Mushir Alam suggested the complainant paying an equivalent amount of money to his sisters in gold if he does not want to get involved in interest-based transactions.

    The judge added, “If you want to follow Shariah, then d on’t add your personal desires into it.”

    Justice Isa expressed outrage over the failure to implement directives of the court for the transfer of land to Abdul Ghafoor’s sisters despite spending three years in court trying to acquire their rightful property. He remarked, “The order of transferring 100 canal land to your sisters is not implemented since three years.”

    The court directed Abdul Ghafoor to submit documents of the transferred land to his two sisters within two weeks and adjourned the hearing.
     
  14. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    SC suspends election tribunal's decision to deseat Qasim Suri
    October 07, 2019

    [​IMG]

    The Supreme Court on Monday suspended the decision of an election tribunal that [nullified][2] Qasim Suri's election as well as the Election Commission of Pakistan's (ECP) decision to de-notify him as a member of the National Assembly.

    The Supreme Court on Monday suspended the decision of an election tribunal that nullified Qasim Suri's election as well as the Election Commission of Pakistan's (ECP) decision to de-notify him as a member of the National Assembly.

    Admitting Suri's appeal for hearing, a three-member of the apex court headed by Justice Umar Ata Bandial issued notices to the parties in the case.

    The top court also asked the election commission not to issue the election schedule for NA-265 (Quetta-II).

    In his appeal, filed by Naeem Bukhari, Suri had questioned the jurisdiction of the ECP to unseat him when it was not constituted properly since the five-member commission was short of two members.

    On September 27, the Balochistan High Court election tribunal had declared the election of Suri, a member of the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) from Balochistan, as void and ordered re-election in the constituency.

    Balochistan National Party's (BNP) Nawabzada Lashkari Raisani had challenged Suri's election, alleging rigging.

    Read: NA prorogued abruptly after ECP unseats deputy speaker

    On Wednesday, the National Assembly session, which was scheduled to continue till October 4, was prorogued abruptly within minutes of its commencement. Members of the opposition alleged that the move was aimed at avoiding election to the vacant office of the deputy speaker.

    The prorogation came hours after the ECP issued a notification of Suri’s unseating.
     
  15. ghazi52

    ghazi52 ELITE MEMBER

    Messages:
    38,584
    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2007
    Ratings:
    +42 / 51,803 / -0
    Country:
    Pakistan
    Location:
    United States
    Definition of terrorism: Convict can’t be released on basis of reconciliation, says SC

    October 12, 2019
    [​IMG]

    ISLAMABAD: A seven-member larger bench of the Supreme Court on Friday announced its judgment on the definition of terrorism and what cases could be tried in the Anti-Terrorism Courts (ATCs) under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) 1997.

    Authored by the Chief Justice of Pakistan Justice Asif Saeed Khosa, the judgment decreed that the release of a perpetrator on the basis of reconciliation was irreconcilable.

    It declared that in an appropriate case, keeping in view the peculiar circumstances of the case, compounding of a coordinate compoundable offence may be considered by a court towards reduction of the sentence, within the permissible limits, passed for commission of a non-compoundable offence.

    “In a terrorism case, a reduction in the sentence will not be automatically reduced after reconciliation between the parties,” it added. The apex court ruled that it would be the court’s discretion to consider reducing the offender’s sentence. The crime of terrorism is different from other crimes. The apex court further remarked that the trial court will consider reduction of the sentence after reconciliation in the terror case.

    Constituted in April to settle the issue, the bench had reserved the judgment after discussing the ramifications of Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) 1997 and “ambiguities” in the law making its implementation problematic.

    The court had also deliberated on whether a settlement between the parties in a ‘terrorism’ case was admissible before the court. The verdict noted that the offence of ‘terrorism’ defined in Section 6 and punishable under Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 was not a compoundable offence but in many cases the offence of terrorism was committed simultaneously with commission of some other offence and such other coordinate offence may sometimes be a compoundable offence.

    “The effect of compounding of such coordinate compoundable offence upon the non-compoundable offence of terrorism or some other non-compoundable offence is a question, which has been referred to the present Larger Bench for resolution,” says the verdict.

    The court briefly narrated the circumstances in which the said question in some of the appeals and petitions, including Moinuddin and another V the State and others.

    Similarly, the court answered the following questions;

    (i) Can a non-compoundable offence be treated as a compoundable offence for the purpose of recording an acquittal in respect of that offence if a coordinate compoundable offence committed in the same case has been compounded by the relevant parties?

    (ii) Can the sentence passed in a non-compoundable offence be reduced on the ground that a coordinate compoundable offence committed in the same case has been compounded by the relevant parties?

    The court held that it had already been clarified in many a case that the non-compoundable offence of terrorism is an offence distinct and independent from any other coordinate offence also committed in the same case including the offences under sections 302, 365-A, 396 and 460, PPC, etc. and a reference in this respect may be made to the cases of Muhammad Amin v The State (2002 SCMR 1017), Muhammad Ali and others v The State and others (PLD 2004 Lahore 554), Muhammad Rawab v The State (2004 SCMR 1170), Muhammad Akhtar alias Hussain v The State (PLD 2007 SC 447) and Kareem Nawaz Khan v The State through PGP and another (2016 SCMR 291).

    “It is hereby held that an offence which the law declares to be non-compoundable remains non-compoundable even if in a coordinate compoundable offence a compounding takes place between the relevant parties and, therefore, despite any compounding of the coordinate compoundable offence an acquittal cannot be recorded in the non-compoundable offence on that sole basis,” says the verdict.

    The court declared that consideration of this factor vis-à-vis reduction of the sentence passed for commission of the non-compoundable offence lies within the discretion of the court and cannot be treated as automatic or as a matter of course.

    The court clarified that in case of compounding of a coordinate compoundable offence reduction of a sentence passed or to be passed for commission of a non-compoundable offence may be considered on that ground by the following courts at the following stages of the case:

    (i) by the trial court at the time of passing the sentence at the end of the trial; or

    (ii) if compounding of the coordinate compoundable offence takes place at the appellate or revisional stage before a High Court or before this Court at the stage of petition for leave to appeal or appeal or review petition then a prayer for reduction of the sentence passed for commission of the non-compoundable offence may be made on that ground before the Court seized of the pending matter; or

    (iii) if this Court has already passed a final order or judgment in a petition for leave to appeal or an appeal and no review petition has been filed so far then reduction of the sentence passed for the non-compoundable offence may be sought on the ground of compounding of the coordinate compoundable offence through filing of a review petition before this Court; or

    (iv) if the remedy of filing of a review petition before this Court has already been exhausted then, there being no scope for filing of a second or subsequent review petition before this Court and a party to a case or anyone else interested in the matter being in no position to seek revisiting of an earlier order or judgment of this Court, the only remedy left for seeking reduction of the sentence passed for commission of a non-compoundable offence on the ground of compounding of a coordinate compoundable offence is to file a Mercy Petition before the worthy President of Pakistan who may, in his discretion, consider this aspect in the light of the judgments passed by this Court on the subject from time to time; or

    (v) if the remedy of a Mercy Petition before the President has already been exhausted before compounding of the coordinate compoundable offence has taken place then after acceptance of the compromise by the competent court in respect of the coordinate compoundable offence the Superintendent of the relevant Jail shall, upon an initiative of the convicted prisoner, forward a fresh Mercy Petition to the President on behalf of that convicted prisoner seeking fresh consideration of the matter by him in respect of the sentence passed against the convicted prisoner for commission of the non-compoundable offence in the light of compounding of the coordinate compoundable offence committed by him.

    “When seized of such a fresh Mercy Petition the President may, in his discretion, consider the matter of the convicted prisoner’s sentence passed for commission of the non-compoundable offence afresh in the light of the judgments passed by this Court on the subject from time to time”, the court held and directed its office to fix the appeals and petitions for hearing before its appropriate benches for their decision in terms of the legal position declared through the present judgment.



    https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/54...e-released-on-basis-of-reconciliation-says-sc