What's new

Panama leak Case Proceedings - JIT Report, News, Updates And Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
.
Many people say that SC can go to "any extent" under 184(3)?

SC ke pass article 187 bhi hai..to do complete justice..they can do anything.. Justice Khosa said tht other courts in the country are courts of law..while SC. Is court of complete justice...

Justice Ijazul Ahsan also agrees with Justice Khosa on article 184/3 and 62/63 too.. Justice Ijazul Ahsan's arguments on 184/3 and on doing complete justice were same as tht of Justice Khosa... Only Justice Ijazul ahsan wanted more investigation to find out undenaible link of NS with properties which have been found in form of FZE company..
 
.
My opinion is different... Justice Khosa is a judge.. Its a basic legal principle ke koi bhi judge one sided opinion sunn kar verdict nahi de sakta.. Dono sides ke arguments hotay hain, behas hoti hai,,uske baad judge verdict detay hain.. Ye jo aapki opinion hai, ke if 3 member bench admits evidence aur uski basis par Justice Khosa aur Gulzar addition kardein..mujhe is liye theek nahi lagti ke koi bhi judge kabhi kisi doosray par depend nahi karta..usay apni ek apni independent opinion deni hoti hai.. Ye nahi hosakta ke koi judge case na sunay aur woh doosray ki opinion blindly accept kar le.. Ek hi bench ke saamnay case chal raha hota aur judges main split hoti hai, tu koi judge blindly kaisy doosray judge ki opinion accept karsakta hai, jab uske saamnay arguments na huay hon? Even panama case man hi Justice Khosa and Gulzar dissented with these judges...ab JIT ki report par arguments sunay baghair kaisy....woh blindly kaisy verdict de saktay hain? Agar sirf blindly JIT report ki basis par verdict banta tu yeh 3 judges dobara JIT. Report par hearing na karrahay hotay.. Simply keh detay ke hum ne zjit banwaayi thee..ab report aagayi..hum is par apni samajh ke mutabiq faisla de detay hain.. Lgkin nahi.. JIT report open court main discuss horahi hai, dono sides ke arguments sunein ge..uske baad hi woh JIT report ki basis par verdict dein ge.. Is liye mujhe nahi lagta ke ye possible hai JIT report par arguments sunay baghair Justice Khosa aur Gulzar apnay previous verdict main additions karsakein

Ye tu almost har routine case main hota hai bench ki taraf se ek hi verdict likha jaata hai aur judges us par sign kartay hain...but tht happens when all judges have heard the case personally aur jo majority judges ki opinion hoti hai, woh koi ek judge likh deta hai..

OK... let me explain my PoV once again..

3 member bench is the implementation bench. JIT was an investigating body formed by 5 member bench. Had this three member bench not resumed and grilled/ cross validate the evidences presented by JIT, acceptance of these evidences would have been very difficult for the 5 member bench..

When this three member bench will provide their attestation on the evidences (if they do, which I still suspect as SC is not a trial court), JIT ke evidences ki legal value kafi ziada hojaegi..

Yeh bilkul aisa hi hai, ke NAB koi case utha kar kisi ko DQ karday, aur woh shakhs SC main appeal le kar jaey, tou SC apna verdict zaroor deti hai..

Meri nazar main agar 3 member bench evidences record karleti hai, tou uss ke baad evidences pe question karna banta hi nahi hai 5 member bench ka.. phir tou bass woh verdict deingay.. aur inn evidences ki basis pe add/ delete karsaktay hain..

Aik aur misaal deta hun.. Agar farz karain, JIT ke saamnay NS clear hojata (Khuda na Khwasta), aur 3 member bench JIT ne saaray evidences ko attest kardeti, aur uss ke baad 5 member bench ke paas jata faisla tou kia hota? Kia justice khosa God Father ka word nikalnay par majboor nahi hotay?
 
.
And here comes PPP to get their (un)fair share in credit for dismantling the $harif Khurburdgan

IMG_0533.JPG


And ... :) in other small news; rift widens between Nisar and Jaan-Nisar ;)
 
.
OK... let me explain my PoV once again..

3 member bench is the implementation bench. JIT was an investigating body formed by 5 member bench. Had this three member bench not resumed and grilled/ cross validate the evidences presented by JIT, acceptance of these evidences would have been very difficult for the 5 member bench..

When this three member bench will provide their attestation on the evidences (if they do, which I still suspect as SC is not a trial court), JIT ke evidences ki legal value kafi ziada hojaegi..

Yeh bilkul aisa hi hai, ke NAB koi case utha kar kisi ko DQ karday, aur woh shakhs SC main appeal le kar jaey, tou SC apna verdict zaroor deti hai..

Meri nazar main agar 3 member bench evidences record karleti hai, tou uss ke baad evidences pe question karna banta hi nahi hai 5 member bench ka.. phir tou bass woh verdict deingay.. aur inn evidences ki basis pe add/ delete karsaktay hain..

Aik aur misaal deta hun.. Agar farz karain, JIT ke saamnay NS clear hojata (Khuda na Khwasta), aur 3 member bench JIT ne saaray evidences ko attest kardeti, aur uss ke baad 5 member bench ke paas jata faisla tou kia hota? Kia justice khosa God Father ka word nikalnay par majboor nahi hotay?

Is 3 member bench ne koi evidence admit /record karna hi nahi hai.. Ye tu kaam trial court ka hoga...jab uske pass case aayega.. Inhon ne tu trial court ko refer kar dena hai case...aur disqualification par faisla dena hai ke sadiq aur ameen hai ya nahi? Trial court tu ye case har haal main jaa raha hai.. Judges have made it very clear.. Aur judges ne ye bhi kaha hai ke hum disqualification ko bhi dekhein ge ke banti hai ya nahi?

Mera khyal hai ke Justice Khosa aur Gulzar ka verdict final hai.... Agar JIT sharif family ko clear bhi kar deti..un do judges ka faisla waheen rehta.. Unhein tu JIT ki zuroorat hi nahi thee.. Us se pehle hi available material ki basis par woh dono disqualify kar chukay thay..
 
.
One more thing @Farah Sohail

3 member bench agar yeh nahi hota jo aaj hai, tou kia hota?

I mean agar implementation bench different judges par mushtamil hota, aur after implementation of the verdict, present karta apnay verdict 5 member bench ko tou kia hota?

Going by your logic, koi bhi judge apnay verdict ko change kar hi nahi sakta tha.. kyun ke unhon ne yeh case suna hi nahi hota..

I think iss 3 member bench ki ehmiat Judicial Commission jaisi hai.. jis ko JIT ka taawun hasil ho..

5 member bench aur 3 member bench entirely different hain.. Hum sab iss liey confuse horahay hain ke CJ ne implementation bench main wohi 3 judges rakhay jo 5 member bench main thay..

Is 3 member bench ne koi evidence admit /record karna hi nahi hai.. Ye tu kaam trial court ka hoga...jab uske pass case aayega.. Inhon ne tu trial court ko refer kar dena hai case...aur disqualification par faisla dena hai ke sadiq aur ameen hai ya nahi? Trial court tu ye case har haal main jaa raha hai.. Judges have made it very clear.. Aur judges ne ye bhi kaha hai ke hum disqualification ko bhi dekhein ge ke banti hai ya nahi?

Mera khyal hai ke Justice Khosa aur Gulzar ka verdict final hai.... Agar JIT sharif family ko clear bhi kar deti..un do judges ka faisla waheen rehta.. Unhein tu JIT ki zuroorat hi nahi thee.. Us se pehle hi available material ki basis par woh dono disqualify kar chukay thay..

Lekin aap yeh bataein na ke agar CJ aik different implementation bench banatay tou kia hota? phir tou koi bhi nahi karpata apna verdict change? agar aap ki baat theek hai tou?

Is 3 member bench ne koi evidence admit /record karna hi nahi hai.. Ye tu kaam trial court ka hoga...jab uske pass case aayega..

Phir tou Khuwaja Haris theek keh raha hai.. ke evidence recording ke liey trial court bhejo, sirf JIT ke evidences ki wajah se PM ko DQ nahi karsakti bench?
 
.
True that, there's no boundary for SC, it is also an authority to interpret law.

Actually there is a boundary of the SC, which is the constitution.

SC has come into existence as a result of the constitution. This is why that when there is a martial law, the SC goes into abeyance (because the constitution goes into abeyance).

Furthermore, SC can interpret the constitution but cannot give any decision outside it (for example, SC cannot give punishment of death by stoning or burning because it is not in constitution).
 
. . .
One more thing @Farah Sohail

3 member bench agar yeh nahi hota jo aaj hai, tou kia hota?

I mean agar implementation bench different judges par mushtamil hota, aur after implementation of the verdict, present karta apnay verdict 5 member bench ko tou kia hota?

Going by your logic, koi bhi judge apnay verdict ko change kar hi nahi sakta tha.. kyun ke unhon ne yeh case suna hi nahi hota..

I think iss 3 member bench ki ehmiat Judicial Commission jaisi hai.. jis ko JIT ka taawun hasil ho..

5 member bench aur 3 member bench entirely different hain.. Hum sab iss liey confuse horahay hain ke CJ ne implementation bench main wohi 3 judges rakhay jo 5 member bench main thay..

Court order se tu aisa hi lag raha tha ke implementation bench ne hi faisla karna tha.bas woh add hojata..previous verdict main..... Likha tha na..ke after receipt of JIT report, final or periodic as the case maybe....matter of disqualification shall be considered.. Periodic JIT report par faisla tu implementation bench hi de sakta tha...?

Lekin ye baat bhi aap ki theek hai..ke implementation bench main agar doosray judges hotay....tu phir kia hota? Doosray judges baghair panama case sunay ...disqualification par faisla kaisy deta?

Lekin aap ko kiya lagta hai ke jab implementation bench ki hearing complete hojayegi...tu 5 member bench ki koi hearing hogi? Hearing tu JIT report par complete hochuki hogi.. Agar entirely diff benches hian tu phir 5 member bench ..kaisy verdict dey ga? JIT report tu dobara discuss hogi nahi..5 member bench ke saamnay...
 
.
:lol:

Sh Azmat Saeed,,

.
:lol::lol:

Pakora judge is Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed
Oh he's not just a pakora. He looks like a mean pakora who probably wanted to be more than just a pakora in his life.

Excuse me for all that I just dont like the guy for the way he is handling this case. Like a little chicken. Not brave enough to say the obvious.
 
.
Phir tou Khuwaja Haris theek keh raha hai.. ke evidence recording ke liey trial court bhejo, sirf JIT ke evidences ki wajah se PM ko DQ nahi karsakti bench?

JIT main jo undisputed facts aagaye hain..uski basis par disqualify hoga... Like FZE company fact.. Ye tu sadiq aur ameen par faisla dein ge..baqi trial court main
 
. .
So it seems like a deal has been reached. RIP Pakistan.
I take him with a pinch of salt, a lot of his predictions never are true. He cast massive doubts on the JIT as well and look how that turned out.
 
.
Lekin aap ko kiya lagta hai ke jab implementation bench ki hearing complete hojayegi...tu 5 member bench ki koi hearing hogi? Hearing tu JIT report par complete hochuki hogi.. Agar entirely diff benches hian tu phir 5 member bench ..kaisy verdict dey ga? JIT report tu dobara discuss hogi nahi..5 member bench ke saamnay...

Main ne iss baaray main kafi socha hai.. mera khayal hai ke sirf aik hearing hogi.. uss main dono taraf ke PoVs liey jaeingay aur phir hearing khatam hojaegi..

JIT main jo undisputed facts aagaye hain..uski basis par disqualify hoga... Like FZE company fact.. Ye tu sadiq aur ameen par faisla dein ge..baqi trial court main

Lekin woh keh raha hai ne keh evidences tou record kar hi nahi sakti court? Tou yeh wala evidence kaisay record hoga khilaaf e qanoon jakey? Isi liey tou judges khud bhi sawal pooch rahay thay ke hum kis hadd tak jasaktay hain khud se, Naeem Bukhari ne unn ki ziada rehnumai nahi ki iss matter pe..

Sirf itna kaha ke jaisay pehlay 2 judges ne kia tha.. uss pe aik judge bolay ke hum qanoon ke mutabiq faisla deingay..
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom