P L D 2005 Lahore 279 (PLP)
ZULFIQAR ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, LAHORE and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | P L D 2005 Lahore 279 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Khawaja Muhammad Sharif and Mian Muhammad Najam uz Zaman, JJ |
| Parties | ZULFIQAR ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, LAHORE and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 2005 Lahore 279 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 2005 Lahore 279 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Khawaja Muhammad Sharif and Mian Muhammad Najam uz Zaman, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 2005 Lahore 279 (PLP) (ZULFIQAR ALI ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, LAHORE and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Hassam Qadir Shah for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 402‑A‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 45 & 199‑‑ Constitutional petition‑‑‑Remission of sentence by the President‑‑ Contentions of the brother of the petitioner/convict who was sentenced to death were that the petitioner/convict was a juvenile at the time of the occurrence; that he belonged to a far‑flung area therefore, he was not aware about the factum of remission of sentence and could not agitate it before the Trial Court, High Court and the Supreme Court; that the Notification of remission was issued by the President on 13‑12‑2001 while the Home Department circulated the same on 15‑8‑2003; that all the related documents were placed before the Sessions Judge but the benefit in question was not extended to the convict and matter being that of life and death of the convict, the benefit of the notification be extended to the convict as well‑‑‑Validity‑‑‑Held, High Court had become functus officio and could not adjudicate upon the matter because the matter was not only decided by the High Court but also by the Supreme Court‑‑‑Matter having never been agitated before Trial Court, Appellate Court as well as the High Court, it was too late in the day to raise such a plea now. Rehmatullah alias Raja v. Home Secretary, Punjab, Lahore and others 2004 SCMR 1861 fol.
Judgment & Decree
Rehmatullah alias Raja v. Home Secretary, Punjab, Lahore and others 2004 SCMR 1861 fol. Syed Hassam Qadir Shah for Petitioner. The petitioner's brother, namely, Muhammad Hadayat alias Teddy, was convicted and sentenced to death by the learned trial Court, the sentence of death was confirmed by this Court, while convict's appeal before the august Supreme Court was dismissed.
2. Learned counsel submits that petitioner convict was a juvenile at the time of the occurrence; that he belongs to a far‑flung area, therefore, he was not aware about the said factum and could not agitate it before the learned trial Court, this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan. Further submits that the Notification in question was issued by the President on 13‑12‑2001 while the Home Department circulated it on 15‑8‑2003. While concluding his submissions, learned counsel contends that all the related documents were placed before the learned Sessions Judge but the benefit in question was not extended to the convict and that it is a matter of death and life of the convict. Prays that the benefit of the said notification, being juvenile, be extended to the convict as well.
3. After having heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length, we are of the considered view that this Court has become functus officio and cannot adjudicate upon the matter because the matter was not only decided by this Court but also by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan. We are fortified our view with a judgment of the apex Court of the country in the case of Rehmatullah alias Raja v. Home Secretary, Punjab, Lahore etc. (2004 SCMR 1861) wherein, after having dilated upon the Notification dated 13‑12‑2001 issued by the President of Pakistan under Article 45 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, it was held as under:‑ "
4. No such age was ever recorded by the trial Court, hence the petitioner would not be, entitled for any commutation. In fact, the question of age was never agitated before the learned trial Court, Appellate Court as well as this Court. It is too late in the day to raise such a plea now as at the time of occurrence, his date of birth has been shown as 8‑3‑1976 which was never challenged and thus there was no occasion for the trial Court to get the ossification test conducted. Nothing has come on record showing that the age was recorded by the trial Court entitles the petitioner to such commutation which is mandatory prerequisite before any benefit is claimed." (Emphasis suppolied).
4. Respectfully following the verdict of the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in the above case, we find no merit in this Constitutional petition which is hereby dismissed. M.B.A./Z‑64/L Petition dismissed.