2014 PLP 1334 (SCMR)
D.-G. A.N.F. RAWALPINDI and others — Appellants/Petitioners Versus MUNAWAR HUSSAIN MANJ and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2014 PLP 1334 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Gulzar Ahmed and Dost Muhammad Khan, JJ |
| Parties | D.-G. A.N.F. RAWALPINDI and others — Appellants/Petitioners Versus MUNAWAR HUSSAIN MANJ and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Supreme Court Rules, 1980 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2014 PLP 1334 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Supreme Court Rules, 1980 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2014 PLP 1334 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Gulzar Ahmed and Dost Muhammad Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2014 PLP 1334 (SCMR) (D.-G. A.N.F. RAWALPINDI and others — Appellants/Petitioners Versus MUNAWAR HUSSAIN MANJ and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellants (in Criminal Appeal No.112 of 2003).
- M. Zawar Shah, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner (in Jail Petition No.170 of 2003).
- Raja Muhammad Ibrahim Satti, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Arshad Ali Ch. Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No.1 (in Criminal Appeal No.112 of 2003).
- M. Zawar Shah, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent No.2 (in Criminal Appeal No.112 of 2003).
- Date of hearing: 20th February, 2014.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment dated 28-1-2003 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Appeal No.1227 of 2001)
O. X
Short order passed by Supreme Court
Scope
Short order signed by majority of the Judges
Treated as final disposition of the matter
Short order passed by the Supreme Court had all the effects of a judgment of the Supreme Court, if such short order had been signed by all or a majority of the Judges hearing the matter, even if for some reason such order was not followed by a detailed judgment
When Judges of the Supreme Court hearing a matter signed the short order, then for all intents and purposes it had to be treated as a final disposition, and absence of any detailed judgment did not require rehearing of the same matter. The State v. Asif Adil and others 1997 SCMR 209; Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry v. President of Pakistan through Secretary and others PLD 2010 SC 61 and Dr. Agha Ijaz Ali Pathan v. The State 2010 SCMR 322 ref. Imran-ul-Haq, Deputy Attorney-General for Pakistan for the Federation (in both cases). Respondents Nos.1 to 3 in person (in Criminal Appeal No.112 of 2003).
Judgment & Decree
ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.
The captioned appeal and the jail petition had been heard by a Bench of three Hon'ble Judges of this Court on 11-11-2008 and through a short order passed on the same date the said appeal and the jail petition had been dismissed with slight modification that the convicts-petitioners were ordered to be extended the benefit under section 382-B, Cr.P.C. The said short order showed that a detailed judgment containing the reasons was to be followed but before such detailed judgment could be rendered all the three Hon'ble Judges mentioned above seized to hold their offices and that is why the office has fixed this appeal and the connected jail petition for rehearing before this Court today.
2. The law is quite settled by now that a short order passed by this Court has all the effects of a judgment of this Court if such short order has been signed by all or a majority of the Hon'ble Judges hearing the matter even if for some reason such order is not followed by a detailed judgment. A reference in this respect may be made to the cases of The State v. Asif Adil and others (1997 SCMR 209), Chief Justice of Pakistan Iftikhar Muhammad Jhaudhry v. President of Pakistan through Secretary and others (PLD 2010 SC 61) and Dr. Agha Ijaz Ali Pathan v. The State (2010 SCMR 322). In the case in hand all the Hon'ble Judges hearing the above mentioned appeal and jail petition had signed the short order passed on 11-11-2008 and, thus, for all intents and purposes that has to be treated as a final disposition of the above mentioned matters and absence of any detailed judgment does not require rehearing of the same. In these circumstances these matters are returned to the office. MWA/D-3/SC Order accordingly.