2024 PLP 63 (SCMR)
TAUFIQ ASIF and others — Applicants Versus General (Retd.) PERVEZ MUSHARRAF and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2024 PLP 63 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Qazi Faez Isa, C.J., Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Amin-ud-Din Khan |
| Parties | TAUFIQ ASIF and others — Applicants Versus General (Retd.) PERVEZ MUSHARRAF and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Law Amendment (Special Court) Act (XVII of 1976) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2024 PLP 63 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Law Amendment (Special Court) Act (XVII of 1976) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2024 PLP 63 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Qazi Faez Isa, C.J., Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, Amin-ud-Din Khan.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2024 PLP 63 (SCMR) (TAUFIQ ASIF and others — Applicants Versus General (Retd.) PERVEZ MUSHARRAF and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Hamid Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (through video-link from Lahore) along with applicant in person for Applicant (in C.M.A. 677 of 2020).
- Haroon-ur-Rasheed, Advocate Supreme Court for Applicant (in C.M.A. 1875 of 2020).
- Rasheed A. Rizvi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (through video-link from Karachi) for Applicant (in C.M.A. 1580 of 2020).
- Qazi Faez Isa, CJ. CMA No. 677/2020 has been filed by Mr. Taufiq Asif, former President of the Lahore High Court Bar Association, CMA No. 1875/2020 has been filed by the Pakistan Bar Council, CMA No. 1580/2020 has been filed by Sindh High Court Bar Association and CMA No. 656-L/2020 has been filed by Hafiz Abdul Rehman Ansari, an advocate of this Court.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 6(1)(f) & 12(3)
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199
Trial of accused before the Special Court
Supreme Court taking cognizance of the trial and passing certain directions therein
High Court entertaining a writ petition filed by the accused despite Supreme Court having taken cognizance of the trial
Constitutionality and legality
Special Court comprising of three Judges of the High Court conducted the trial of respondent No. 1 at Islamabad and convicted him
During an interim stage of the trial the matter had come up before the Supreme Court, which took cognizance of the trial before the Special Court at Islamabad and gave certain directions to the Special Court (to proceed with the trial in the absence of accused)
However, in complete disregard of the fact that the Supreme Court had taken cognizance of the Special Court's trial at Islamabad and had sustained it the Lahore High Court entertained a writ petition filed by respondent No. 1, and then allowed it (declaring the formation of the special court as violative of law, and devoid of legal sanctity)
Counsel for the applicants submitted that the Lahore High Court had no territorial jurisdiction; that the jurisdiction of special courts is attended to in section 12 of the Criminal Law Amendment (Special Court) Act, 1976 and the purported judgment by the Lahore High Court was in derogation thereof; that the Lahore High Court did not have constitutional jurisdiction under any of the provisions of Article 199 of the Constitution; that the purported judgment of the Lahore High Court was ab initio void, illegal, unconstitutional and coram non judice; that the writ petition was not maintainable before the Lahore High Court; that the Lahore High Court assumed jurisdiction which exclusively vested in the Supreme Court, under section 12(3) of the Criminal Law Amendment (Special Court) Act, 1976; and that the Lahore High Court had acted in complete derogation of the Constitution and of the law and that it is the duty of bar associations, bar councils and lawyers to ensure that the Constitution and the law is not violated and, if such illegalities are committed, to bring the same to the notice of the Supreme Court to rectify them
Supreme Court observed that the said submissions were substantial and legal points which required consideration
Supreme Court directed that the office shall number the present petitions and issue notices to the respondents, except respondent No. 1 who had since passed away, however, the legal heirs of respondent No. 1 may come forward to join these cases; that the record of the writ petition before the Lahore High Court, including the office file directing fixing of the case and constitution of special bench be requisitioned from the Lahore High Court and be put up along with present petitions on the date they are fixed before the Supreme Court for hearing
Applications were allowed accordingly. Lahore High Court Bar Association v. General (Retd.) Pervez Musharraf, 2019 SCMR 1029 and Pervez Musharraf v. Federation of Pakistan PLD 2020 Lah. 285 ref. Hamid Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (through video-link from Lahore) along with applicant in person for Applicant (in C.M.A. 677 of 2020). Haroon-ur-Rasheed, Advocate Supreme Court for Applicant (in C.M.A. 1875 of 2020). Rasheed A. Rizvi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court (through video-link from Karachi) for Applicant (in C.M.A. 1580 of 2020). Applicant in person (in C.M.A. 656-L of 2020). Ch. Aamir Rehman, Additional Attorney-General for Pakistan.
Judgment & Decree
Qazi Faez Isa, CJ. CMA No. 677/2020 has been filed by Mr. Taufiq Asif, former President of the Lahore High Court Bar Association, CMA No. 1875/2020 has been filed by the Pakistan Bar Council, CMA No. 1580/2020 has been filed by Sindh High Court Bar Association and CMA No. 656-L/2020 has been filed by Hafiz Abdul Rehman Ansari, an advocate of this Court.
2. It is submitted by the learned counsel that a Special Court comprising of three Judges of the High Court had conducted the trial at Islamabad and gave its judgment at Islamabad. It is further submitted that during an interim stage of the trial the matter had come up before this Court before a three-member Bench of this Court whose decision has been reported (Lahore High Court Bar Association v. General (Retd.) Pervez Musharraf, 2019 SCMR 1029); the order of this Court was authored by one of us (Syed Mansoor Ali Shah, J, which necessitated his inclusion in this Bench). This Court had taken cognizance of the trial before the Special Court at Islamabad and had given certain directions to the Special Court vide order dated 1 April 2019. However, in complete disregard of the fact that the Supreme Court had taken cognizance of the Special Court's trial at Islamabad and had sustained it the Lahore High Court entertained W.P. No. 71713/2019, and then allowed it, on 13 January 2020 (reported as Pervez Musharraf v. Federation of Pakistan, PLD 2020 Lahore 285). 4(sic.) The learned counsel submit that: (i) The Lahore High Court had no territorial jurisdiction; (ii) The jurisdiction of special courts is attended to in section 12 of the Criminal Law Amendment (Special Court) Act, 1976 and the purported judgment by the Lahore High Court is in derogation thereof; (iii) The Lahore High Court did not have constitutional jurisdiction under any of the provisions of Article 199 of the Constitution; (iv) The purported judgment of the Lahore High Court was ab initio void, illegal, unconstitutional and coram non judice; (v) The writ petition was not maintainable before the Lahore High Court; (vi) The Lahore High Court assumed jurisdiction which exclusively vested in the Supreme Court, under section 12(3) of the Criminal Law Amendment (Special Court) Act, 1976; and (vii) The Lahore High Court had acted in complete derogation of the Constitution and of the law and that it is the duty of bar associations, bar councils and lawyers to ensure that the Constitution and the law is not violated and, if such illegalities are committed, to bring the same to the notice of this Court to rectify them.
5. The abovementioned are substantial and legal points which require consideration, therefore, subject to all just exceptions, these applications are allowed and the office is directed to number the petitions and issue notices to the respondents, except respondent No. 1 who has since passed away, however, the legal heirs of respondent No. 1 may come forward to join these cases.
6. The record of W.P. No. 71713/2019, including the office file directing fixing of the case and constitution of special bench be requisitioned from the Lahore High Court and be put up along with these petitions when they are fixed in Court for hearing on Tuesday, 21 November 2023 at 11.30 a.m. MWA/T-5/SC Applications allowed.