SCMR 2005

2005 PLP 1497 (SCMR)

AZHAR IQBAL and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Criminal Review Petition No.14-L of 2003 in Criminal Petition No.781-L of 2002, decided on 6th July, 2004.
Honorable Judges
Hamid Ali Mirza and Falak Sher, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2005 PLP 1497 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Hamid Ali Mirza and Falak Sher, JJ
Parties AZHAR IQBAL and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan (1973)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1497 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 1497 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Hamid Ali Mirza and Falak Sher, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1497 (SCMR) (AZHAR IQBAL and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)

Representation

  • Ch. Naseer Ahmad Bhutta, Advocate Supreme Court and Muhammad Ozair Chughtai, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners.
  • Nemo. for Respondent.
  • Date of hearing: 6th July, 2004.

Headnotes / Summary

(On review from the judgment dated 10-1-2003 in Cr.P. No.781-L of 2002 passed by this Court).

Art. 188

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.345

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.338-E

Review petition

Limitation

Review petition was barred by 130 days for which application for condonation of delay was filed by petitioner on grounds that efforts were being made for compromise between the, parties and that delay in filing of review petition had occurred due to optimum hope of compromise which was normally expected when a person was awarded capital punishment

Validity

Such plea could not be considered as sufficient cause for examining review on merits in view of fact that said plea could be agitated by petitioner before Trial Court as provided under S.338-E, P.P.C. and S.345, Cr.P.C. which had provided that Court could permit compounding of offence between parties and legal representatives of deceased

Review .petition being barred by time, was dismissed.

Judgment & Decree

HAMID ALI MIRZA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.

2. This review petition is barred by 130 days for which an application for condonation of delay has been filed wherein in paras. 1 to 5 he has stated the grounds for condoning the delay stating that there were efforts for compromise between the parties and there was still hope that the compromise could take place between the parties and facing this situation, the delay in filing of review petition has occurred due to optimum hope of the compromise which is normally expected when a person is awarded capital punishment. We do not consider it as a sufficient cause for examining the review on merits considering the fact that this very plea could be agitated by the petitioner which has been made as one of the ground for review before the trial Court as provided under section 338-E, P.P.C., read with section 345, Cr.P.C., which Court could permit the compounding of offence between the petitioner and L.Rs. of the deceased in accordance with law. In the circumstances, finding petition barred by time and no case for review, the same is dismissed. H.B.T./A-81/S Petition dismissed. ***