What's new

Panama Case - Post Verdict Discussion and Updates

Prosecutor actually tried to refer to Panama verdict yesterday and Paji Faiz Essa said that the bench wasn't hearing Panama case..

Yes prosecutor referred but didnt read his verdict.. casually refer karna aur baat hai aur inke 14 paragraphs parhna alag ... when Qazi Faez Isa said ke hum panama case nahi sun rahay.. prosecutor said tht both cases are related.. but uss ke saath hi prosecutor ko ye bhi kehna chahye tha ke both cases are related ..iska proof ye hai ke Justice Khosa ne panama verdict main 14 paragraphs hudaibya case par likhay hian aur saath hi phir prosecutor ko owh 14 paragraphs waheen parhnay chahye thay.

Sirf yeh keh dena ke both cases are related...kafi nahi... Jutsice Khosa's verdict is really important.. i think 90% kaam Jutsice Khosa already kar chukay hain.. sirf unke verdict ko use karnay ki zuroorat hai sahi se...

Qazi Faez Isa aur doosray judges ke saamnay jab woh paragraphs parhay jayein ge jis main sharif family ne kis tarah apna influence use kia...tu woh usay kis tarah negate karein ge?

Qazi Faez Isa ko chorein... baqi 2 judges bhi tu hain.. justice Mushir Alam ke remarks mujhe itnay buray nahi lagay kal...aur ek judge tu kuch bolay hi nahi.. Justice Mazhar Alam Miankhel..... Justice Khosa walay bench main bhi thay tu unke saamnay Justice Khosa ne jaatay jaatay apnay remarks repeat bhi kiye thay..

SC se i think ye case reopen hojayega.. lekin sharif family saari garbar..accountability court main karay gi aut wahan se bach jayein ge..jaisy ab basheera ko manage kar liya hai.. lekin SC ki hadd tak tu ye case reopen karnay ki permission mil jayegi
 
Last edited:
.
Excerpts from Justice Khosa's verdict regd Hudaibya case

--------------------------

101. Respondent No. 1’s brush with criminal law is also not new. In the case of Mian Hamza Shahbaz Sharif v. Federation of Pakistan and others (1999 P.Cr.L.J. 1584) two FIRs had been registered by the Federal Investigation Authority in the year 1994 and Challans in respect of such FIRs had been submitted before the competent court with the allegations that respondent No. 1 and others had indulged in serious corruption and money laundering, etc. Those Challans had been quashed later on at a time when respondent
No. 1 was serving as the Prime Minister of the country. In the case of Messers Hudabiya Paper Mills Ltd. and others v. Federation of Pakistan and others (PLD 2016 Lahore 667) a Reference had been filed by the National Accountability Bureau against respondent No. 1 and others with the allegations of corruption and money laundering, etc. but even that Reference was quashed during the incumbency of respondent No. 1 as the Prime Minister of the country.

----------------------

128. Adverting to the two FIRs registered by the Federal Investigation Agency and a Reference filed by the National Accountability Bureau against respondent No. 1, respondent No. 10 and others I note that all those criminal proceedings had been quashed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore at a time when respondent No. 1 was serving as the Prime Minister of the country and the manner in which such proceedings were quashed, it is observed with respect, had left much to be desired. To top it all, neither the Federal Investigation Agency nor the National Accountability Bureau challenged such quashing of criminal proceedings before this Court.


130. Reference No. 5 of 2000 had been filed against respondents No. 1 and 10 and some others by the National Accountability Bureau before an Accountability Court with allegations of money laundering, etc. to the tune of Rs. 1242.732 million (over Rs. 1.2 billion) and in that Reference reliance had also been placed upon a judicial confession made by respondent No. 10 before a Magistrate First Class, Lahore on April 25, 2000. It was alleged in that Reference that respondent No. 10 was instrumental in laundering of 14.886 million US Dollars upon the instructions and for the benefit of respondent No. 1 by opening fake foreign currency accounts in different banks in the names of others. Writ Petition No. 2617 of 2011 filed before the Lahore High Court, Lahore in connection with that Reference was allowed by a learned Division Bench of the said Court on December 03, 2012 and the said Reference was quashed through a unanimous judgment but the learned Judges disagreed with each other over permissibility of
reinvestigation of the matter whereupon the matter was referred to a learned Referee Judge who held on March 11, 2014 that reinvestigation of the case was not permissible [Reference: Hudabiya Paper Mills Ltd. v. Federation of Pakistan (PLD 2016 Lahore 667)]. There was an apparent flaw in the judgment rendered in that case by the learned Referee Judge because the reference to the learned Referee Judge was as to whether an observation could be made or not regarding reinvestigation of the case and the reference was not as to whether reinvestigation could be carried out or not! Even that judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore was not challenged by the National Accountability Bureau or the State before this Court and incidentally respondent No. 1 was again the Prime Minister of Pakistan at that time.
The said Reference had been quashed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore because in the investigation preceding filing of the Reference the accused persons had not been associated and a confessional statement made by respondent No. 10 had been made before a Magistrate and not before the Accountability Court which was the trial court. I may observe with respect that soundness of both the said reasons prevailing with the High Court for quashing the relevant Reference was quite suspect. The relevant record produced before us shows that on April 20, 2000 a written application had been submitted by respondent No. 10 before the Chairman, National Accountability Bureau volunteering to make a confession and seeking tender of pardon. Respondent No. 10 personally appeared before the Chairman, National Accountability Bureau in that connection on April 21, 2000 and on the same day full pardon was tendered by the Chairman to him under section 26 of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 whereafter respondent No. 10 made a confessional statement before a Magistrate First Class, Lahore on April 25, 2000. In view of this development in the Final Reference filed by the National Accountability Bureau on November 16, 2000 respondent No. 10 was referred to as a prosecution witness and not an accused person. In the said confessional statement made by respondent No. 10 under section 164, Cr.P.C. he had confessed to being a party to money laundering of 14.886 million US Dollars on the instructions and for the benefit of respondent No. 1 and also to opening of fake foreign currency accounts in different banks in the names of others. It is not denied that making of the said confessional statement and signing of the same had never been denied by respondent No. 10 and he had never approached any court seeking setting aside or annulment of that statement made by him and it was the accused persons in the above mentioned Reference who had maintained before the High Court that respondent No. 10 had made his confessional statement under coercion of the military regime of that time after remaining in custody for more than six months (from October 15, 1999 to April 25, 2000). Be that as it may the fact remains that in the Final Reference which was quashed by the High Court respondent No. 10 was not arrayed as an accused person and his status in that Reference was that of merely a prosecution witness and, thus, quashing of that Reference by the High Court did not entail respondent No. 10’s acquittal or smothering of any possibility of his trial on the said charges at any subsequent stage. It is also quite obvious that with quashing of the Reference and setting aside of the confessional statement of respondent No. 10 the pardon tendered to respondent No. 10 by the Chairman, National Accountability Bureau under section 26 of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 ipso facto disappeared with an automatic revival of the said respondent’s status as an accused person who had never been acquitted and against whom no Reference had been quashed. As respondent No. 10 was not an accused person in the relevant Reference when it was quashed and reinvestigation of which was declared by the High Court to be impermissible, therefore, I see no reason why after restoration of respondent No. 10’s status as an accused person in that case reinvestigation to his extent and filing of a Reference against him cannot be undertaken or resorted to. This is more so because the reasons prevailing with the Lahore High Court, Lahore for quashing the Reference were not applicable to the case of respondent No. 10 as he had been associated with the investigation and there was evidence available against him other than his confessional statement. The stark reality is that the allegations of corruption, corrupt practices and money laundering, etc. involving over Rs. 1.2 billion and prosecution on the basis of such allegations had been scuttled by the High Court and this Court would not like to stand in the way of reopening of the said investigation or prosecution where even the smallest opening for such investigation or prosecution is available or legally possible. One of the prayers made before this Court by the petitioner in Constitution Petition No. 29 of 2016 is that the Chairman, National Accountability Bureau may be directed to file a petition/appeal before this Court against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore whereby Reference No. 5 of 2000 filed by the National Accountability Bureau had been quashed and reinvestigation of the matter was held to be impermissible and also that proceedings may be initiated before the Supreme Judicial Council against the Chairman, National Accountability Bureau under Article 209 of the Constitution for his removal from office. The circumstances in which Reference No. 5 of 2000 filed by the National Accountability Bureau had been quashed and reinvestigation of the matter was held by the High Court to be impermissible might have tempted me to issue a direction to the State or the National Accountability Bureau to challenge the said judgment of the High Court before this Court through a time-barred petition/appeal but I have found it to be inappropriate for an appellate court to direct a party to a case to file a petition or an appeal before it in a matter decided by a Court below. Issuance of such a direction can have the effect of compromising the impartiality of the appellate court and clouding its neutrality and, thus, I have restrained myself from issuing the direction prayed for. Initiating proceedings against the Chairman, National Accountability Bureau under Article 209 of the Constitution may involve some jurisdictional issues and the same may also be inappropriate for this Bench of the Court to order because two of the Members of this Bench are also Members of the Supreme Judicial Council and such Members may feel embarrassed in the matter. Apart from that we have been informed that the term of office of the present Chairman, National Accountability Bureau is about to expire in the next few months and his term of office is non-extendable.

131. It may be true that the Challans in the above mentioned two FIRs registered with the Federal Investigation Agency had been quashed and the accused persons therein had been acquitted by the Lahore High Court, Lahore and Reference No. 5 of 2000 filed by the National Accountability Bureau before an Accountability Court had also been quashed by the said Court and thereby the allegations leveled against respondents No. 1 and 10 and some others in those matters had remained without a trial
but the fact remains that the evidence collected or the material gathered by the investigating agencies in connection with those cases does not stand vanished and the same remains available and can be usefully utilized if such evidence or material is also relevant to some other allegations leveled against the said respondents or others.

---------------------------

@PakSword @Shane Read these excerpts from Justice Khosa's verdict regarding hudaibya case ...esp parts in bold and red...... all questions asked by judges yesterday have been answered by Justice Khosa already..

Ab batayein ke is sab ke baad...doosray judges ke pass kitna chance reh jata hai..NAB ki appeal ko reject karnay ka?

Aur Ye tu main ne NAB ka hudaibya case ke reference se related excerpts share kiye hain Justice Khosa ki verdict se.. FIA ka bhi reference tha releted to hudaibya case...bhtt similar...which was also quashed by Lahore high court...us ko bhi itni hi detail se discuss kiya hai Justice Khosa ne... woh excerpts tu main ne abhi yahan share nahi kiye..

Itna sab kuch likh diya Justice Khosa ne...is sab Justice Qazi Faez Isa aur doosray judges kaisy reject karsaktay hian ke ye sab references tab quash uhay when Nawaz Sharif was the PM? Kal yehi pooch rahay thay na judges ke batayein sharif family kaisy influence karsakti thee..in references ko? Is sba ka jwab tu in excerpts mian mojood hai..

Is liye SC se NAB ki appeal reject hona tu almost impossible hai warna ye judges bhtt ziada badnaam honge.. Justice Khosa sharif family ko phansaany ka poora kaam kar gaye hain @PakSword

Jab ye reference reopen hoga..tab accountability court se zuroor sharif family acquit hosakti hai...wahan zuroor inhein relief milay ga lekin SC se mushkil hai...warna buri tarah expose hojayein ge ye judges..
 
. .
@PakSword @Shane Read these excerpts from Justice Khosa's verdict regarding hudaibya case ...esp parts in bold and red...... all questions asked by judges yesterday have been answered by Justice Khosa already..

Ab batayein ke is sab ke baad...doosray judges ke pass kitna chance reh jata hai..NAB ki appeal ko reject karnay ka?

Aur Ye tu main ne NAB ka hudaibya case ke reference se related excerpts share kiye hain Justice Khosa ki verdict se.. FIA ka bhi reference tha releted to hudaibya case...bhtt similar...which was also quashed by Lahore high court...us ko bhi itni hi detail se discuss kiya hai Justice Khosa ne... woh excerpts tu main ne abhi yahan share nahi kiye..

Itna sab kuch likh diya Justice Khosa ne...is sab Justice Qazi Faez Isa aur doosray judges kaisy reject karsaktay hian ke ye sab references tab quash uhay when Nawaz Sharif was the PM? Kal yehi pooch rahay thay na judges ke batayein sharif family kaisy influence karsakti thee..in references ko? Is sba ka jwab tu in excerpts mian mojood hai..

Is liye SC se NAB ki appeal reject hona tu almost impossible hai warna ye judges bhtt ziada badnaam honge.. Justice Khosa sharif family ko phansaany ka poora kaam kar gaye hain @PakSword

Jab ye reference reopen hoga..tab accountability court se zuroor sharif family acquit hosakti hai...wahan zuroor inhein relief milay ga lekin SC se mushkil hai...warna buri tarah expose hojayein ge ye judges..

Actually, Paji Faiz is coming from another end. He is asking, when was the reference quashed? Was NS a a prime minister at the time of quashing?

Plus he has tried to hide behind technical reasons. For example, how many days NAB is required to file a reference? Can NAB continue to blackmail an individual forever?

He is a clever man! He knows that he has to raise such questions which put the responsibility eventually on NAB entirely, so that he could say that it was not the fault of the accused if one institution hasn't done its work even when the accused wasn't in power.

Clever man he is..
 
.
Actually, Paji Faiz is coming from another end. He is asking, when was the reference quashed? Was NS a a prime minister at the time of quashing?

Plus he has tried to hide behind technical reasons. For example, how many days NAB is required to file a reference? Can NAB continue to blackmail an individual forever?

He is a clever man! He knows that he has to raise such questions which put the responsibility eventually on NAB entirely, so that he could say that it was not the fault of the accused if one institution hasn't done its work even when the accused wasn't in power.

Clever man he is..

Did u read the excerpts..I shared here?

@bold.. Reference was quashed by LHC in 2014..when Nawaz Sharif was the PM.. and Justice KHosa has clearly mentioned tht reference was quashed when Nawaz Sharif was the PM, and reasons for quashing the reference by LHC were quite suspect.. so Justice Khosa has clearly implied tht LHC did it under pressure from NS..

Infact Justice Khosa said tht the fct tht NAB did not appeal on LHC verdict was also because NS was the PM..

So itna sab kuch kehnay ke baad..ab baqi kia reh jata hai?

Although you are right about Justice Qazi Faez Isa.. he is trying to raise technical points ..he is trying to bail out Nawaz sharif by blaming it all on NAB.. he did the same in Dr Asim ECL case.. blamed NAB and then removed him from ECL..

Leave QAzi Faez Isa.. what about other two judges? Do u think...tht it will be easy for other judges to reject Justice Khosa's verdict...when he has already written in so much detail regd hudaibya case? And Justice Khosa clearly said tht LHC judgment of quashing reference was flawed...

It can be 2-1 judgment too.... abhi humein doosray judges ko dekhna hai ke woh kia kartay hain? Justice Mushir Alam ke remarks shayad itnay buray nahi thay..

Aap ko nahi lagta ke agar ye judges hudaibya ko reopen karnay ki NAB ki appeal....reject kardetay hain....Justice Khosa ki itni detailed verdict ke baad bhi tu ye judges bhtt badnaam honge?

Mujhe hudaibya case...accountability court main bigarta nazar aaraha hai.. SC se tu shayad reopen hojayega..lekin asal masla accuontability court main hoga.. wahan se sharif family bach jayegi
 
Last edited:
.
Justice Khosa ke 14 paragraphs ko NAB ko....is case ki proceedings ka part banaana chahye...
I think i read somewhere that the judges have included volume 8 of JIT in the record. I don't know that if a dissenting order in another case can be made part of another but if so then not making it part of this case shall mean the obvious. We need expert legal input on this very valid point you have raised as it certainly will be a sureshot nail in their coffins.

SC se tu reopen hojayega hudaibya case.. saari garbar pihr accuontability court main hogi...jaisy basheera karraha hai.. wahan manage karein ge sharifs...accountability court ko...aur wahan se acquit honge...
Sara chakkar aik dafa iss case k dobara khulnay say mashroot hay. Agar, if you are sure like i am too, then no need to worry about lower courts as the tilt of lower courts usually sides in favour of the ones in control of the flow of events, which pmln is not due to its infighting and religious incitement debacle.
It is time for PTI to raise and demonstrate its political power on the streets while the sharifs try to reconstruct their ever dwindling and dismal political image.
Real legal war starts in higher courts anyway.
Clever man he is.
If and im sure he is indeed a clever man, then he must be a survivor who knows what way to choose from the obvious.

Whoever tries to save the sharifs after what has come to light in Panama case, shall go down in history as a dark spot on the face of judiciary.

We have had a bunch of pathetic former judges that everybody knows about, the likes of Malik Qauum. Not a league to be remembered with or named alongside.

Still if anyone is not so clever then we may see what another Kangaroo looks like. What else can we do but watch, hope and pray for the best and side with the truth.
Mujhe hudaibya case...accountability court main bigarta nazar aaraha hai.. SC se tu shayad reopen hojayega..lekin asal masla accuontability court main hoga.. wahan se sharif family bach jayegi
Retrospectively speaking, Shayad aap theek hee keh rahay ho but as i said earlier that to me, real legal war starts in higher courts anyway as Sharifs are notoriously known to have gotten the better of lower courts in the past. In their cases, anything against them in trial courts shall be a bonus...

All the above is why when covert or overt supporters of pmln shout that they want accountability for the judges and other institutions, it sounds so ironic and puts a smile on our faces.

Accountability for all has been exactly the need of the hour since forever because of the influence and pressure they have commanded over the very judiciary themselves over the years.
 
.
جھوٹی گواہی دینے والوں کیخلاف جلد مہم شروع کی جائے گی ،جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ

سپریم کورٹ نے قتل کے ملزم کی عمر قید کی سزا کالعدم قرار دیدی ،رہا کرنے کا حکم
اردو پوائنٹ تازہ ترین / بدھ 29 نومبر 2017 | 17:40
اسلام آباد (اُردو پوائنٹ اخبارتازہ ترین۔ 29 نومبر2017ء) سپریم کورٹ میں فوجداری مقدمے کی سماعت کے دوران جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ نے ریمارکس دیئے ہیں کہ عنقریب جھوٹی گواہی دینے والوں کے خلاف ایک مہم شروع کرنیوالے ہیں ، جھوٹی گواہی سے سچ چھپایا جاتا ہے جبکہ عدالت نے قتل کے مقدمے میں ہائی کورٹ سے سزا یافتہ ملزم کو دس سال بعد بری کرنے کا حکم دیدیا ہے ۔منگل کو کیس کی سماعت جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ کی سربراہی میں تین رکنی بنچ نے کی دوران سماعت جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ نے ریمارکس دیئے کہ پنجاب کے قانون میں عمر قید کی جگہ بریت لکھا جانا چاہیے،جرم ثابت ہو گیا تو سزائے موت جرم ثابت ناہوتو عمر قید سنائی جاتی ہے ،پنجاب میں جس کا کیس نہیں بنتا اسے بری کیا جانا چاہیے، جسٹس کھوسہ کا کہنا تھا کہ جو لوگ جرم کرتے ہیں انکوضرور جیلوں میں رکھا جائے لیکن جنہوں نے کوئی جرم نہیں کیا تو انہیں جیل میں رکھنا غلط ہے ،ہمیں مجرم سے کوئی محبت نہیں مگر جھوٹی سزا پراعتراض ہے، جسٹس کھوسہ کا کہنا تھا کہ عنقریب جھوٹی گواہی دینے والوں کے خلاف ایک مہم شروع کرنیوالے ہیں ،جھوٹی گواہی دینے والوں کے خلاف کارروائی کی جائے گی،جھوٹی گواہی سے سچ چھپایا جاتا ہے، انہوں نے کہا کہ عمرقید کا مطلب ساری زندگی جیل میں رہنا ہے، عمرقید کا مطلب 25 سال جیل میں گزارنا پتہ نہیں کہاں سے نکال کر لے آئے ہیں ،عمر قید کا مطلب ساری زندگی جیل میں گزارنا ہے ،ہم نے عمرقید کی سزا کی تشریح کی تو لوگ سزائے موت کی اپیلیں کرینگے ۔

بعد ازاں عدالت نے وکلاء کے دلائل سننے کے بعد ملزم کو بری کرنے کا حکم دیدیا ۔ یا د رہے کہ ملزم اورنگزیب پر 2007میں عبدالطیف کو اوکاڑہ میں قتل کاالزام تھا، ٹرائل کورٹ نے ملزم کو سزائے موت جبکہ ہائیکورٹ نے عمر قید کی سزا سنائی تھی۔

I really hope it happens soon.. Just like Justice Khosa initiated model cuorts project in punjab...i hope he starts this new initiative against false witnesses soon
 
.
I think i read somewhere that the judges have included volume 8 of JIT in the record. I don't know that if a dissenting order in another case can be made part of another but if so then not making it part of this case shall mean the obvious. We need expert legal input on this very valid point you have raised as it certainly will be a sureshot nail in their coffins.

Justice Khosa's verdict is no longer a dissenting verdict.. esp after panama review verdict.. he wrote a paragraph tht no one challenged my verdict..hence no need of a review.. means he stands by his earlier verdict and no judge disagreed with him...so his verdict is now part of main verdict..

Even if we overlook this....but even in panama initial verdict...no judge disagreed with his views regd hudaibya case..

Also..in proceedings after JIT report.. Justice Ejaz Afzal asked NAB ke kitna time lagay ga..aap ko LHC ke verdict ke against appeal karnay main? NAB prosecutor said 1 week... but NAB didnt even appeal then.. then Sheikh Rashid against went to SC which was heard by all 5 judges of panama case when panaa review petition was being heard.. At tht time...all 5 judges gave remarks and pushed NAB to file an appeal against LHC verdict...none disagreed with it..

So its not only Justice Khosa's verdict but all 5 judges pushed NAB to file an appeal in this case...

So i think Justice Khosa's verdict can be quoted as it is no longer a dissenting or minority verdict..as is evident from panama review verdict where Justice kahosa wrote 3-4 lines

Sara chakkar aik dafa iss case k dobara khulnay say mashroot hay. Agar, if you are sure like i am too, then no need to worry about lower courts as the tilt of lower courts usually sides in favour of the ones in control of the flow of events, which pmln is not due to its infighting and religious incitement debacle.
It is time for PTI to raise and demonstrate its political power on the streets while the sharifs try to reconstruct their ever dwindling and dismal political image.
Real legal war starts in higher courts anyway.

@bold.. no ..its not the case... sirf basheera ko hi dekh lein.. how he is giving relief after relief to sharif family.. he is openly siding with sharifs..even after SC gave harsh verdict against Nawaz sharif...

Retrospectively speaking, Shayad aap theek hee keh rahay ho but as i said earlier that to me, real legal war starts in higher courts anyway as Sharifs are notoriously known to have gotten the better of lower courts in the past. In their cases, anything against them in trial courts shall be a bonus...

All the above is why when covert or overt supporters of pmln shout that they want accountability for the judges and other institutions, it sounds so ironic and puts a smile on our faces.

Accountability for all has been exactly the need of the hour since forever because of the influence and pressure they have commanded over the very judiciary themselves over the years.

I think high courts also cant be trusted.. they have lot of sympathisers in high courts as well..and some even in SC...

I think amongst all SC judges...panama case judges hi sab se achay hain... . Hmm...i think even Justice Umar Ata Bandial and Justice Faisal Arab are fine..
But i dont like Qazi Faez Isa at all...jo baatein bari bari kartay hain aur kaam kuch nahi
 
Last edited:
.
جھوٹی گواہی دینے والوں کیخلاف جلد مہم شروع کی جائے گی ،جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ

سپریم کورٹ نے قتل کے ملزم کی عمر قید کی سزا کالعدم قرار دیدی ،رہا کرنے کا حکم
اردو پوائنٹ تازہ ترین / بدھ 29 نومبر 2017 | 17:40
اسلام آباد (اُردو پوائنٹ اخبارتازہ ترین۔ 29 نومبر2017ء) سپریم کورٹ میں فوجداری مقدمے کی سماعت کے دوران جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ نے ریمارکس دیئے ہیں کہ عنقریب جھوٹی گواہی دینے والوں کے خلاف ایک مہم شروع کرنیوالے ہیں ، جھوٹی گواہی سے سچ چھپایا جاتا ہے جبکہ عدالت نے قتل کے مقدمے میں ہائی کورٹ سے سزا یافتہ ملزم کو دس سال بعد بری کرنے کا حکم دیدیا ہے ۔منگل کو کیس کی سماعت جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ کی سربراہی میں تین رکنی بنچ نے کی دوران سماعت جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ نے ریمارکس دیئے کہ پنجاب کے قانون میں عمر قید کی جگہ بریت لکھا جانا چاہیے،جرم ثابت ہو گیا تو سزائے موت جرم ثابت ناہوتو عمر قید سنائی جاتی ہے ،پنجاب میں جس کا کیس نہیں بنتا اسے بری کیا جانا چاہیے، جسٹس کھوسہ کا کہنا تھا کہ جو لوگ جرم کرتے ہیں انکوضرور جیلوں میں رکھا جائے لیکن جنہوں نے کوئی جرم نہیں کیا تو انہیں جیل میں رکھنا غلط ہے ،ہمیں مجرم سے کوئی محبت نہیں مگر جھوٹی سزا پراعتراض ہے، جسٹس کھوسہ کا کہنا تھا کہ عنقریب جھوٹی گواہی دینے والوں کے خلاف ایک مہم شروع کرنیوالے ہیں ،جھوٹی گواہی دینے والوں کے خلاف کارروائی کی جائے گی،جھوٹی گواہی سے سچ چھپایا جاتا ہے، انہوں نے کہا کہ عمرقید کا مطلب ساری زندگی جیل میں رہنا ہے، عمرقید کا مطلب 25 سال جیل میں گزارنا پتہ نہیں کہاں سے نکال کر لے آئے ہیں ،عمر قید کا مطلب ساری زندگی جیل میں گزارنا ہے ،ہم نے عمرقید کی سزا کی تشریح کی تو لوگ سزائے موت کی اپیلیں کرینگے ۔

بعد ازاں عدالت نے وکلاء کے دلائل سننے کے بعد ملزم کو بری کرنے کا حکم دیدیا ۔ یا د رہے کہ ملزم اورنگزیب پر 2007میں عبدالطیف کو اوکاڑہ میں قتل کاالزام تھا، ٹرائل کورٹ نے ملزم کو سزائے موت جبکہ ہائیکورٹ نے عمر قید کی سزا سنائی تھی۔

I really hope it happens soon.. Just like Justice Khosa initiated model cuorts project in punjab...i hope he starts this new initiative against false witnesses soon

I posted earlier about not losing hope as there is still a lot to come, specially on the legal front...
I get exactly where you are coming from. But doesn't this same "getting away with it" line of argument applicable on all Firauons of their times until they get their noose pulled.

I wrote a while ago that I don't care who is the chief or chairman or president of anywhere or anything...Nawaz & co are facing MakafateAmal... No thanx to any institutions or personalities but a power beyond earthly confines.

The only way left for them to go is down...

The graveyards of history are full of people who were considered the luckiest b@$#@rds on earth and thought of themselves indispensable.

Why so much despair...

We have to wait and watch, even if they get away from the country like Musharraf did, we will witness how the next govt. and Supreme Court pursues the corrupt under Chief Justice Gulzar and Chief Justice Khosa etc etc.

Again, why despair, why not wait for cases to conclude. Let's see who gets exposed and taken down with the ones headed towards their demise.

I for one don't think that the deal iblees was handed while being kicked out was not an NRO by any definition of the term or stretch of imagination.

Specifically, the part about the coming days of SCP...

we will witness how the next govt. and Supreme Court pursues the corrupt under Chief Justice Gulzar and Chief Justice Khosa etc etc.

So i find no reason to believe that the corrupt will get away with what they have been over the years.
 
.
I posted earlier about not losing hope as there is still a lot to come, specially on the legal front...

Specifically, the part about the coming days of SCP...

So i find no reason to believe that the corrupt will get away with what they have been over the years.

Justice Khosa will become CJ in Jan2019 andJustice Gulzar in Nov 2019.. 2019 se pehle hi NS ke cases ki appeal SC se decide hochuki hogi... aur agar ye CJ ban bhi jaatay tu NS ki panama referemces ki SC appeal main waisy bhi i think.....panama judges nahi honge..... koi aur hi judges ye appeal sunein ge.. so am not very hopeful
 
.
Justice Khosa will become CJ in Jan2019 andJustice Gulzar in Nov 2019.. 2019 se pehle hi NS ke cases ki appeal SC se decide hochuki hogi... aur agar ye CJ ban bhi jaatay tu NS ki panama referemces ki SC appeal main waisy bhi i think.....panama judges nahi honge..... koi aur hi judges ye appeal sunein ge.. so am not very hopeful

I think that when other judges of SCP will get to hear the appeals, they will not be able to ignore and go against the unanimous decision of the five member Panama bench?

I think that once the Hudaibya case restarts, there is very little chance that any judges can manage to ignore the findings of Justice khosa that are written in his verdicts.

Nawaz & co are going through the worst of times and facing political and legal annihilation due to their very plans and diversions, have been going haywire one after the other, due to a force that is beyond human control.
 
.
Did u read the excerpts..I shared here?

@bold.. Reference was quashed by LHC in 2014..when Nawaz Sharif was the PM.. and Justice KHosa has clearly mentioned tht reference was quashed when Nawaz Sharif was the PM, and reasons for quashing the reference by LHC were quite suspect.. so Justice Khosa has clearly implied tht LHC did it under pressure from NS..

Yes I read, and what I understood was:

Writ Petition No. 2617 of 2011 filed before the Lahore High Court, Lahore in connection with that Reference was allowed by a learned Division Bench of the said Court on December 03, 2012 and the said Reference was quashed through a unanimous judgment but the learned Judges disagreed with each other over permissibility of
reinvestigation of the matter whereupon the matter was referred to a learned Referee Judge who held on March 11, 2014 that reinvestigation of the case was not permissible

- References were quashed somewhere between 2012 and 2014. As far as I remember, I read somewhere that references were

- Referee judge held in 2014 (when NS was PM) that the re investigation was also not permissible.

-----------

This is exactly what Paji asked.. when was the reference quashed? Was NS PM at the time of quashing?

Leave QAzi Faez Isa.. what about other two judges? Do u think...tht it will be easy for other judges to reject Justice Khosa's verdict...when he has already written in so much detail regd hudaibya case? And Justice Khosa clearly said tht LHC judgment of quashing reference was flawed...

My only worry is that Paji is so vocal that sometimes he is successful in impressing other judges of the bench. I have heard that because of his continuous bla bla bla, many cases have been decided on the basis of technicalities.
 
.
Ye thread band kardo bhai. Mujhse nani hota.

Chor do

Log apni madad apke tehat maar denge. Nahi chaiye paise.

In sub ko chaingazi qanoon ke tehat saza do ya chor do. Baki sab drama ha. They have state protection.
 
.
Aap ko nahi lagta ke agar ye judges hudaibya ko reopen karnay ki NAB ki appeal....reject kardetay hain....Justice Khosa ki itni detailed verdict ke baad bhi tu ye judges bhtt badnaam honge?

بدنام اگر ہوں گے تو کیا نام نہ ہوگا

Joke aside, money sometimes do wonders.. and the individual forgets about respect and dignity.


Ye thread band kardo bhai. Mujhse nani hota.

Chor do

Log apni madad apke tehat maar denge. Nahi chaiye paise.

In sub ko chaingazi qanoon ke tehat saza do ya chor do. Baki sab drama ha. They have state protection.

Sir lagta hai aaj kuppi nahi mili... lolz..

Mujhe hudaibya case...accountability court main bigarta nazar aaraha hai.. SC se tu shayad reopen hojayega..lekin asal masla accuontability court main hoga.. wahan se sharif family bach jayegi

Agar hudaibiya reopen hogaya... tou phir Bari tind ke saath chhoti tind ka bhi kaam tamaam samjhain..

جھوٹی گواہی دینے والوں کیخلاف جلد مہم شروع کی جائے گی ،جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ

سپریم کورٹ نے قتل کے ملزم کی عمر قید کی سزا کالعدم قرار دیدی ،رہا کرنے کا حکم
اردو پوائنٹ تازہ ترین / بدھ 29 نومبر 2017 | 17:40
اسلام آباد (اُردو پوائنٹ اخبارتازہ ترین۔ 29 نومبر2017ء) سپریم کورٹ میں فوجداری مقدمے کی سماعت کے دوران جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ نے ریمارکس دیئے ہیں کہ عنقریب جھوٹی گواہی دینے والوں کے خلاف ایک مہم شروع کرنیوالے ہیں ، جھوٹی گواہی سے سچ چھپایا جاتا ہے جبکہ عدالت نے قتل کے مقدمے میں ہائی کورٹ سے سزا یافتہ ملزم کو دس سال بعد بری کرنے کا حکم دیدیا ہے ۔منگل کو کیس کی سماعت جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ کی سربراہی میں تین رکنی بنچ نے کی دوران سماعت جسٹس آصف سعید کھوسہ نے ریمارکس دیئے کہ پنجاب کے قانون میں عمر قید کی جگہ بریت لکھا جانا چاہیے،جرم ثابت ہو گیا تو سزائے موت جرم ثابت ناہوتو عمر قید سنائی جاتی ہے ،پنجاب میں جس کا کیس نہیں بنتا اسے بری کیا جانا چاہیے، جسٹس کھوسہ کا کہنا تھا کہ جو لوگ جرم کرتے ہیں انکوضرور جیلوں میں رکھا جائے لیکن جنہوں نے کوئی جرم نہیں کیا تو انہیں جیل میں رکھنا غلط ہے ،ہمیں مجرم سے کوئی محبت نہیں مگر جھوٹی سزا پراعتراض ہے، جسٹس کھوسہ کا کہنا تھا کہ عنقریب جھوٹی گواہی دینے والوں کے خلاف ایک مہم شروع کرنیوالے ہیں ،جھوٹی گواہی دینے والوں کے خلاف کارروائی کی جائے گی،جھوٹی گواہی سے سچ چھپایا جاتا ہے، انہوں نے کہا کہ عمرقید کا مطلب ساری زندگی جیل میں رہنا ہے، عمرقید کا مطلب 25 سال جیل میں گزارنا پتہ نہیں کہاں سے نکال کر لے آئے ہیں ،عمر قید کا مطلب ساری زندگی جیل میں گزارنا ہے ،ہم نے عمرقید کی سزا کی تشریح کی تو لوگ سزائے موت کی اپیلیں کرینگے ۔

بعد ازاں عدالت نے وکلاء کے دلائل سننے کے بعد ملزم کو بری کرنے کا حکم دیدیا ۔ یا د رہے کہ ملزم اورنگزیب پر 2007میں عبدالطیف کو اوکاڑہ میں قتل کاالزام تھا، ٹرائل کورٹ نے ملزم کو سزائے موت جبکہ ہائیکورٹ نے عمر قید کی سزا سنائی تھی۔

I really hope it happens soon.. Just like Justice Khosa initiated model cuorts project in punjab...i hope he starts this new initiative against false witnesses soon

And I hope that the first casualty of this movement is Maryam.. because she presented false trust deed, which equals false witness.

If and im sure he is indeed a clever man, then he must be a survivor who knows what way to choose from the obvious.

Whoever tries to save the sharifs after what has come to light in Panama case, shall go down in history as a dark spot on the face of judiciary.

We have had a bunch of pathetic former judges that everybody knows about, the likes of Malik Qauum. Not a league to be remembered with or named alongside.

Still if anyone is not so clever then we may see what another Kangaroo looks like. What else can we do but watch, hope and pray for the best and side with the truth.

Problem with our nation is that we sometimes prefer money over everything..
 
. .

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom