2007 SCMR 1402 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD NAZIM and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 SCMR 1402 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Javed Iqbal and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD NAZIM and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 SCMR 1402 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 SCMR 1402 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Javed Iqbal and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 SCMR 1402 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD NAZIM and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sayyed Mazhar Ali Akbar Naqvi, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner (in Criminal Petition No.110-L of 2005).
- Muhammad Akram Sheikh, Nasiruddin Khan Nayyar and M.A. Zaidi, Senior Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner, (in Criminal Petition No.109-L of 2005).
- Zahid Hussain Bukhari, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant.
- JAVED IQBAL, J.--- Heard Sayyed Mazhar Ali Akbar Naqvi, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner (in Criminal Petition No. 109-L of 2005) and Mr. Muhammad Akram Sheikh, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Mr. Nasiruddin Khan Nayyar, learned Advocate Supreme Court for petitioner (in Criminal Petition No.110-L of 2005), as well as Mr. Zahid Hussain Bukhari, learned Advocate Supreme Court for complainant, scanned the entire record with their eminent assistance and perused the judgment impugned with care and caution. We are inclined to grant leave in the above captioned petitions, inter alia, on the following points:--
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 8-2-2005 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Criminal Appeal No.320 of 2003).
S. 302(b)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Leave to appeal was granted on the points; (i) whether evidence which had come on record had been appreciated in its true perspective in accordance with the settled norms of justice and the well-entrenched principles enunciated by Supreme Court qua the safe administration of justice; that whether the capital punishment could have been awarded on the basis of interested and partisan evidence furnished by the interested witnesses in absence of any corroboration and in view of admitted background of enmity; that whether the factum of absconsion could be considered as a corroboratory piece of evidence in case of capital punishment and that whether the judgment impugned was in consonance with the law as laid down in case reported as 1995 SCMR 1373 qua factum of absconsion. Rasool Muhammad v. Asal Muhammad 1995 SCMR 1373 ref. Zahid Hussain Bukhari, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
JAVED IQBAL, J.
Heard Sayyed Mazhar Ali Akbar Naqvi, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner (in Criminal Petition No. 109-L of 2005) and Mr. Muhammad Akram Sheikh, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Mr. Nasiruddin Khan Nayyar, learned Advocate Supreme Court for petitioner (in Criminal Petition No.110-L of 2005), as well as Mr. Zahid Hussain Bukhari, learned Advocate Supreme Court for complainant, scanned the entire record with their eminent assistance and perused the judgment impugned with care and caution. We are inclined to grant leave in the above captioned petitions, inter alia, on the following points:-- (i) Whether the evidence which had come on record has been appreciated in its true perspective in accordance, with the settled norms of justice and the well-entrenched principles enunciated by Supreme Court qua the safe administration of justice? (ii) Whether the capital punishment could have been awarded on the basis of interested and partisan evidence furnished by the interested witnesses in absence of any corroboration and in view of admitted background of enmity? (iii) Whether the factum of absconsion can be considered as a corroboratory piece of evidence in case of capital punishment? (iv) Whether the judgment impugned is in consonance with the law laid down by this Court in case Rasool Muhammad v. Asal Muhammad 1995 SCMR 1373 qua factum of absconsion. The appeals may be fixed at some early date. H.B.T./M-44/SC Leave granted.