1998 PLP 2354 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD ARSHAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1998 PLP 2354 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sajjad Ali Shah C. J. and Munawar Ahmad Mirza, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ARSHAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 2354 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 2354 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sajjad Ali Shah C. J. and Munawar Ahmad Mirza, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 2354 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ARSHAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Qazi M. Anwar, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 18th November, 1996.
- Qazi M. Anwar, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Tariq Pervez, Advocate Supreme Court and Abdul Hamid Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record for the Complainant.
- Malik Hamid Saeed, Additional Advocate-General, N.-W.F.P. for the State.
- SAJJAD ALI SHAH, C.J.---An application is filed by Mr. Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record, in which it is stated that Raja Muhammad Anwar, learned counsel for the petitioner, is unable to attend the Co rt as he is busy before the Supreme Court at Lahore. Qazi Muhammad Anwar, Advocate Supreme Court, is present in the Court and states that he is appearing alongwith Raja Muhammad Anwar for the petitioner and he would like to argue the petition in spite of the fact that Raja Muhammad Anwar is unable to attend the Court on account of his professional engagement. Mr. Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record states that in the circumstances he does not press the application for adjournment, which he withdraws. The said application for adjournment is, therefore, dismissed as withdrawn.
- 3. After the petition for transfer was filed in this Court order was passed on 19-3-1996 for issuance of notice to the Advocate-General, N.-W.F.P., for a date in office and meanwhile proceedings before the High Court have been stayed. On behalf of the petitioner, the prayer is for transfer of appeal and Murder Reference to any other High Court in Pakistan as there is apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that outcome of the appeal and Murder Reference would be influenced to his prejudice.
- 4. Qazi Muhammad Anwar, learned counsel for the petitioner, when asked that regardless of the result if the appeal and reference are finally disposed of, the matter would come to the Supreme Court in any case but he insists for disposal of the petition for transfer on merits. When asked whether it would be agreeable to the petitioner for hearing of appeal and Murder Reference if choice is given to him of the Judges in Peshawar High, he has come out with the names of two Hon'ble Judges, namely, Mr. Justice J.D. Akbarji and Mr. Justice Sardar A Muhammad Raza Khan. We have also been informed that paper book is ready and appeal is ripe for hearing and in fact it was fixed for hearing on 19-3-1996 but had to be adjourned as petition was filed in this Court for transfer. To this proposal learned counsel for the complainant and learned Additional Advocate General, N.-W.F.P., present in the Court have no objection.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Art. 186‑A‑‑‑Petition for transfer of criminal appeal and murder reference which were pending for hearing before Peshawar High Court to another High Court‑‑‑Ground for transfer of appeal and murder reference as urged by petitioner was that in the murder case deceased was brother of Chief Justice of Peshawar High Court‑‑‑On Court's query whether it would be agreeable to petitioner for hearing of appeal and murder reference if choice was given to him of Judges in Peshawar High Court, for hearing the cases, he came up with names of two Judges‑‑‑Court was‑informed that paper book was ready and appeal was ripe for hearing and, in fact, it was fixed for hearing on specified date but had to be adjourned for petition for transfer was filed in Supreme Court‑‑‑Counsel for complainant and counsel for State had no objection if appeal and murder reference were heard by the Judges named by accused person‑‑‑Supreme Coun desired that Chief Justice of Peshawar High Court would constitute Bench consisting of Judges of High Court named by accused for disposal of criminal appeal and murder reference. Tariq Pervez, Advocate Supreme Court and Abdul Hamid Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for the Complainant. Malik Hamid Saeed, Additional Advocate‑General, N.‑W.F.P. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
SAJJAD ALI SHAH, C.J.
An application is filed by Mr. Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record, in which it is stated that Raja Muhammad Anwar, learned counsel for the petitioner, is unable to attend the Co rt as he is busy before the Supreme Court at Lahore. Qazi Muhammad Anwar, Advocate Supreme Court, is present in the Court and states that he is appearing alongwith Raja Muhammad Anwar for the petitioner and he would like to argue the petition in spite of the fact that Raja Muhammad Anwar is unable to attend the Court on account of his professional engagement. Mr. Ejaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record states that in the circumstances he does not press the application for adjournment, which he withdraws. The said application for adjournment is, therefore, dismissed as withdrawn.
2. This is a petition under Article 186-A of the Constitution with prayer for transfer of Criminal Appeal No.32 of 1995 and Murder Reference No.4 of 1995 which are pending for hearing before Peshawar High Court against petitioner, Muhammad Arshad, who is accused in the murder case and is convicted and sentenced to death by the trial Court vide judgment dated 18-1-1995. Ground for transfer of appeal and Murder Reference as urged by the petitioner is that in the said murder case deceased was brother of Mr. Justice Ibne Ali,, who is the Chief Justice of the Peshawar High Court.
3. After the petition for transfer was filed in this Court order was passed on 19-3-1996 for issuance of notice to the Advocate-General, N.-W.F.P., for a date in office and meanwhile proceedings before the High Court have been stayed. On behalf of the petitioner, the prayer is for transfer of appeal and Murder Reference to any other High Court in Pakistan as there is apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that outcome of the appeal and Murder Reference would be influenced to his prejudice.
4. Qazi Muhammad Anwar, learned counsel for the petitioner, when asked that regardless of the result if the appeal and reference are finally disposed of, the matter would come to the Supreme Court in any case but he insists for disposal of the petition for transfer on merits. When asked whether it would be agreeable to the petitioner for hearing of appeal and Murder Reference if choice is given to him of the Judges in Peshawar High, he has come out with the names of two Hon'ble Judges, namely, Mr. Justice J.D. Akbarji and Mr. Justice Sardar A Muhammad Raza Khan. We have also been informed that paper book is ready and appeal is ripe for hearing and in fact it was fixed for hearing on 19-3-1996 but had to be adjourned as petition was filed in this Court for transfer. To this proposal learned counsel for the complainant and learned Additional Advocate General, N.-W.F.P., present in the Court have no objection.
5. In the circumstances, we would appreciate very much if the learned Chief Justice of Peshawar High Court constitutes a Bench consisting of Mr. Justice Jalal-ud-Din Akbarji and Mr. Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan for disposal of appeal and Murder Reference mentioned above within one month.
6. The petition is disposed of in the terms stated above. A.A./M-91/S Order accordingly.