1998 PLP 1400 (SCMR)
Captain S.M. ASLAM‑‑‑Appellant Versus Mst. RUBY AKHTAR and another‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1998 PLP 1400 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Khan, Munir A. Sheikh and Maulana Muhammad Taqi Usmani, JJ |
| Parties | Captain S.M. ASLAM‑‑‑Appellant Versus Mst. RUBY AKHTAR and another‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 1400 (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 1400 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Khan, Munir A. Sheikh and Maulana Muhammad Taqi Usmani, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1998 PLP 1400 (SCMR) (Captain S.M. ASLAM‑‑‑Appellant Versus Mst. RUBY AKHTAR and another‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Ansar Hussain, Advocate with Imitaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Appellants (in both Appeals).
- Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent No. 1 (in Shariat Appeal No. 70(S) of 1992).
- Syed Mumtaz Hussain, Advocate with Raja Abdul Ghafoor, Advocate- on‑Record for Respondents Nos. l and 2 (in Shariat Appeal No. 32(S) of 1995).
- Date of hearing: 12th March, 1998,
- Syed Ansar Hussain, Advocate with Imitaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Appellants (in both Appeals).
- Muhammad Bashir Kiani, Advocate Supreme Court with Ejaz
- Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent No. 1 (in Shariat Appeal No. 70(S) of 1992).
- Syed Mumtaz Hussain, Advocate with Raja Abdul Ghafoor, Advocate- on-Record for Respondents Nos. l and 2 (in Shariat Appeal No. 32(S) of 1995).
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑Art. 203‑F (2B)‑‑‑Compromise‑‑‑Parties who were litigating for the last more than a decade had submitted a compromise application withdrawing the complaints filed against each other (subject‑matter of the appeals) and had also agreed not to prosecute the other civil and criminal cases pending in different Courts (list provided)‑‑‑Compromise was accepted in order to end the long litigation between the parties. Muhammad Bashir Kiani, Advocate Supreme Court with Ejaz Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
KHALIL-UR-REHMAN KHAN, J.
This order will dispose of two Criminal Shariat Appeals bearing Nos.70(S) of 1992 and 32(S) of 1995.
2. The parties have submitted a compromise application withdrawing the complaints filed against each other, subject-matter of these two appeals. They I have also agreed not to prosecute the other civil and criminal cases, lodged against each other and presently pending in different Courts. A list of these cases has been attached as Annexure-A to the Compromise Application.
3. As the litigation going on between the parties for the last more than a decade will be no more, the compromise is accepted and permission to withdraw the complaints is allowed. The result of the compromise is that the order of conviction against Captain Syed Muhammad Aslam, appellant in Shariat Appeal No.70(S) of 1992 is set aside and the Complaints stand dismissed as withdrawn. Both the appeals are disposed of in terms of compromise. The other cases pending in various Courts shall also stand disposed of. Copies of this order and the application with its Annexure shall be produced by the parties before the Courts before which the cases are pending for having the said litigation dismissed/discharged. N.H.Q./S-52/S Compromise accepted.