2004 PLP 243 (SCMR)
BAZ MUHAMMAD and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE through National Accountability Bureau, Quetta — Respondent
| Citation | 2004 PLP 243 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Munir A. Sheikh, Qazi Muhammad Farooq and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ |
| Parties | BAZ MUHAMMAD and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE through National Accountability Bureau, Quetta — Respondent |
| Primary Law | National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of 1999) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 243 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: National Accountability Ordinance (XVIII of 1999) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 243 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Munir A. Sheikh, Qazi Muhammad Farooq and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 243 (SCMR) (BAZ MUHAMMAD and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE through National Accountability Bureau, Quetta — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Ayaz Zahoor, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner in Criminal Petition No.5.3-Q of 2001.
- M. Siddique Khan; Advocate Supreme Court with M.A. Zaidi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner in Criminal Petition No.235 of 2001.
- Date of hearing: 28th May, 2002.
- M.S. Rakhshani, Advocate Supreme Court with M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 13-9-2001 of the High Court of Balochistan, Quetta, passec4 in Criminal. Ehtesab Appeals Nos. 16 and I'7 of 2001).
S. 10
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
heave to appeal was granted to reappraise the evidence and to examine whether the findings recorded by the Courts below against the accused about this conviction satisfied the requirements of the principles for safe administration of criminal justice, as it was contended that it was a case of no evidence
Accused had already served out their substantive sentences, and their sentences in default of payment of fine were suspended and they were admitted to bail in view of grant of leave to appeal to them. M.S. Rakhshani, Advocate Supreme Court with M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record for the State.
Judgment & Decree
S. 10
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
heave to appeal was granted to reappraise the evidence and to examine whether the findings recorded by the Courts below against the accused about this conviction satisfied the requirements of the principles for safe administration of criminal justice, as it was contended that it was a case of no evidence
Accused had already served out their substantive sentences, and their sentences in default of payment of fine were suspended and they were admitted to bail in view of grant of leave to appeal to them. Syed Ayaz Zahoor, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner in Criminal Petition No.5.3-Q of 2001. M. Siddique Khan; Advocate Supreme Court with M.A. Zaidi, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner in Criminal Petition No.235 of 2001. M.S. Rakhshani, Advocate Supreme Court with M.S. Khattak, Advocate-on-Record for the State. Date of hearing: 28th May, 2002. By this common order we intend to decide the above titled two petitions as they are directed against the same judgment , involving common questions of law and facts.
2. Leave is granted to reappraise the evidence whether findings recorded by the Courts below against the petitioners .about their conviction satisfy the requirements of principles laid down by this Court for safe administration of criminal justice as it is contended that it was a case of no evidence. 3: We have heard both the learned counsel: The petitioners have already served out their substantive sentences. Since leave has already been granted in both petitions to reappraise the evidence, therefore, sentences awarded to the petitioners in default of 'payment of fine are hereby suspended and they are admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.2,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. N.H.Q./B-69/S Leave granted.