P L D 2005 Supreme Court 19 (PLP)
FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad — Petitioner Versus ZAFAR AWAN — Respondent
| Citation | P L D 2005 Supreme Court 19 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Shariat Review Jurisdiction |
| Bench Members | Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar, Chairman, Justices Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, Mian Shakirullah Jan, Dr. Allama Khalid Mahmud and Dr. Rashid Ahmed Jullundhari, Members |
| Parties | FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad — Petitioner Versus ZAFAR AWAN — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 2005 Supreme Court 19 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 2005 Supreme Court 19 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Shariat Review Jurisdiction bench comprising: Justice Abdul Hameed Dogar, Chairman, Justices Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, Mian Shakirullah Jan, Dr. Allama Khalid Mahmud and Dr. Rashid Ahmed Jullundhari, Members.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 2005 Supreme Court 19 (PLP) (FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad — Petitioner Versus ZAFAR AWAN — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- ----Ss.402-C & 197---Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act (XL of 1958), S.6(5)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.188---Review of judgment--Deadline for amending S.402-C, Cr.P.C.---Federal Shariat Court declared the provisions of S.197 Cr.P.C. and S.6 (5) of Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958, as repugnant to Injunctions of. Islam---Judgment passed by Federal Shariat Court was maintained by Shariat Appellate Bench of Supreme Court---Review of the judgment passed by Shariat Appellate Bench of Supreme Court was sought on the ground that the provisions of S.402-C, Cr.P.C. had no been examined---. Validity---Counsel for petitioner / Federation of Pakistan conceded that S.402-C, Cr.P.C. had no nexus with the provisions of S.197 Cr.P.C. and S.6(5) of Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958---In order to bring the provisions of Chapter XVI, P.P.C., dealing with the offences of the human body, in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam, amendment was brought in Penal Code, 1860, vide Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Ordinance, 1990, whereby Ss.299 to 338-H, P.P.C. were substituted---Corresponding amendment was made in S.345 Cr.P.C. whereby offences mentioned in Chapter XVI, P.P.C. were made compoundable with the consent of the victim or as the case may be, of the legal heirs of .victim---In Criminal Procedure Code, 1898, S.402-C was added in Chapter XXIX, after.S.402-B, Cr.P.C. vide Criminal Law (Fourth Amendment) Ordinance, 1991, so as to bring it in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam as laid down by the Holy Qur'an and Sunnah; it was vide the added provision of law that the composition, suspension, remittance and commutation of sentences passed under any of .the sections in Chapter XVI of Penal Code, 1860, would not be done without the consent of the victim or as the case might be of his heirs-- Contentions of the petitioner were neither convincing nor in consonance with the provisions of law, as such, were misconceived---Supreme Court gave a deadline of 31st March, 2005, to Federal Government for making necessary amendments up to such date, failing which the provisions of law would cease' to have effect---Review petition was dismissed.
- Hafiz S.A. Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in both cases).
- Nemo for Respondent (in both cases).
Headnotes / Summary
Ss.402-C & 197
Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act (XL of 1958), S.6(5)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.188
Review of judgment--Deadline for amending S.402-C, Cr.P.C.
Federal Shariat Court declared the provisions of S.197 Cr.P.C. and S.6 (5) of Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958, as repugnant to Injunctions of. Islam
Judgment passed by Federal Shariat Court was maintained by Shariat Appellate Bench of Supreme Court
Review of the judgment passed by Shariat Appellate Bench of Supreme Court was sought on the ground that the provisions of S.402-C, Cr.P.C. had no been examined
. Validity
Counsel for petitioner / Federation of Pakistan conceded that S.402-C, Cr.P.C. had no nexus with the provisions of S.197 Cr.P.C. and S.6(5) of Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958
In order to bring the provisions of Chapter XVI, P.P.C., dealing with the offences of the human body, in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam, amendment was brought in Penal Code, 1860, vide Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Ordinance, 1990, whereby Ss.299 to 338-H, P.P.C. were substituted
Corresponding amendment was made in S.345 Cr.P.C. whereby offences mentioned in Chapter XVI, P.P.C. were made compoundable with the consent of the victim or as the case may be, of the legal heirs of .victim
In Criminal Procedure Code, 1898, S.402-C was added in Chapter XXIX, after.S.402-B, Cr.P.C. vide Criminal Law (Fourth Amendment) Ordinance, 1991, so as to bring it in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam as laid down by the Holy Qur'an and Sunnah; it was vide the added provision of law that the composition, suspension, remittance and commutation of sentences passed under any of .the sections in Chapter XVI of Penal Code, 1860, would not be done without the consent of the victim or as the case might be of his heirs-- Contentions of the petitioner were neither convincing nor in consonance with the provisions of law, as such, were misconceived
Supreme Court gave a deadline of 31st March, 2005, to Federal Government for making necessary amendments up to such date, failing which the provisions of law would cease' to have effect
Review petition was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
Hafiz S.A. Rehman, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in both cases). Nemo for Respondent (in both cases). Date of hearing: 11th October, 2004. ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, CHAIRMAN.
By this common order, we propose to dispose of Shaira Review Petition Nos. 1 and 2 of 1991 as they arise out of judgment dated 30-11-1991 of this Court whereby Shariat Appeals Nos. 16 and 17 of 1989 filed by petitioner were dismissed and the order of learned Federal Shairat Court declaring the provisions of section 197 Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898) and that of subsection (5) of section 6 of the Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958 (Act No.XL of 1958) declaring them repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam was maintained.
2. It is, inter alia, contended by Haifiz S.A. Rehman, learned counsel for the petitioner that this Court while dismissing the Shairat Appeals and declaring the above provisions of law as repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam has omitted to examine the effect of provisions of section 402-C of the Criminal Procedure Code which is an error apparent on the fact of the record necessitating the review of the matter. When confronted with the provision of section 402-C, Cr.P.C. learned counsel frankly conceded that it has no nexus with the provisions of section 197, Cr.P.C. or subsection (5) of section 6 of the Act.
3. In order to bring the provisions of Chapter XVI dealing with the offences of the human body in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam, an amendment was brought in Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 vide Criminal Law (Second Amendment) Ordinance, 1990 whereby sections 299 to 338-H, P.P.C. were substituted. A corresponding amendment was made in section 345, Cr.P.C. whereby offences mentioned in the above Chapter were made compoundable with the consent of the victim, or as the case may be, of legal heirs of victim. Section 402-C, Cr.P.C. was added in Criminal Procedure Code in Chapter XXIX, after section 402-B vide Criminal Law (Fourth Amendment) Ordinance, 1991 so as to bring it in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam as laid down by the Holy Qur an and Sunnah. It was vide this added provision of law the composition, suspension, remittance and commutation of sentences passed under any of the section in Chapter XVI, Pakistan Penal Code, shall not be done without consent of the victim or as the case may be of his heirs.
4. It would be advantageous tore produce section 402-C, Cr.P.C.:-- Remission or Commutation of certain sentences not to be without consent.--Notwithstanding anything contained in section 401, section 402; section 402-A or section 402-B, the Provincial Government', the Federal Government or the President shall not, without the consent of the victim or, as the case may be, of .his heirs, suspend, remit or commute any sentence passed under any of the sections in Chapter XVI of the Pakistan Penal Code.
5. The contentions of learned counsel for the petitioner are neither convincing nor in consonance with the above provisions of law, as such, are misconceived. The review petitions being devoid of force are dismissed. However, necessary amendments be made up to 31st March 2005, failing which these provisions of law will cease to have effect. M.H./F-25/S Petition dismissed.