Federal Court

Federal Court-Criminal appeal-Orders passed in exercise of revisional jurisdiction by High Court-Not ordinarily interfered with by Federal Court-Discretion, however, not exercised judicially High Court's order set aside and that of lower Court restored.

Appraisement of evidence in criminal matters-Jurisdiction and practice. Sarfaraz All Khan v. Crown P L D 1951 F C 41; Dilawar v. Crown P L D 1952 F C 108 ; Muhammad Sarfaraz Khan v. The Crown P L D 1953 F C 317 and Khuda Bakhsh v. The Crown P L D 1955 F C 318 ref.

Power to review its own document ire exceptional cases. The Federal Court has, if it considers it necessary so to do, the power to review its own judgment.

Judges equally divided in opinion Order of High Court to be maintained. Nazir Ahmad Khan, Senior Advocate, Federal Court, (Fazal Elahi, Advocate, Federal Court, with him) instructed by M. Siddiq, Attorney for Appellants.

S. 34 (1) (a)-Federal Court Whether Court or authority within meaning of section-Privy Council (Abolition of Jurisdiction) Act, 1950, S. 4-Government of India Act, 1935, Ss. 109, 210.

Findings of fact recorded by High Court in criminal matter-Ordinarily not to be interfered with, except in case of grave injustice. The Federal Court does not interfere with findings of fact recorded on the evidence by the High Court except in case of grave injustice. In following that course, the Court has continued the practice of the Privy Council in this regard, and the Privy Council bad found it necessary in the interests of justice to review findings of fact in the light of the evidence, where, in its opinion there had been a grave injustice.

Not a Court of criminal appeal?Interference restricted to cases of substantial and grave injustice due to disregard of forms of legal process or violation of principles of natural justice.

Federal Court Whether may - overrule its own previous decision-Government of India Act, 1935, S. 212.

Federal Court-Will reconsider conclusion of Chief Court in criminal case re finding as to grave and sudden provocation when conclusion not based on true appreciation of case or examination of intrinsic nature of evidence.

Federal Court Federal Court-Criminal appeal-Judgment appealed from containing obviously incorrect statements-Charge of misappropriation not substantiated-Conviction and sentence set aside.

Federal Court Federal Court-Appeal-Whether High Court can grant certificate for, in, criminal matter-Federal Court Rules, O. XXII, O. XLIV, r. 6-Privy Council (Abolition of Jurisdiction Act, 1950, S. 3. Rule 6 of Order XLIV does not authorise the High Courts to grant a certificate to an intending appellant in a criminal case and thus confer powers on the High Court which it does not otherwise possess.

Federal Court Federal Court-When will interfere in decision of High Court in criminal cases-Irregularity of procedure resulting in substantial and grave injustice. While the Federal Court's interest must always be thought to be attracted towards proved irregularities of procedure, yet a long course of practice in the Privy Council makes it clear that interference with the decision of the Courts below will not necessarily follow upon the ascertainment of every irregularity of procedure.

Federal Court -When will interfere in criminal matters-Violation of principles of natural justice-Summary dismissal of appeal by High Court without indicating reasons

Tantamount to denial of fair hearing.

Federal Court Scope of jurisdiction-Successor of Privy Council-Court of general jurisdiction-No positive limitation upon jurisdiction-Supreme Tribunal of Pakistan-Sole Judge of its own jurisdiction-Privy Council (Abolition of Jurisdiction) Act, 1950, S.8(2)-Government of India Act, 1935, Ss. 204, 205, 209, 212Judicial Committee Act, 1833.Subordination of other Courts-India of subordination-View of the highest Court of Appeal last product of fruitful collaboration by all Courts constituting the judicial system.Precedents of - Duty of other Courts it treatment of.Status

Highest Court of Record in Pakistan - Attitude of High Court as a Court of Record towards directions of Federal Court-"One of ready compliance.".

Federal Court Interference by, in conclusions, arrived at by High Court-Conditions-Does not function "in free fashion as fully constituted Court of criminal appeal"-Denial or perversion of justice-Disregard of forms of legal processor violation of principle should not merely be technical but grievous and substantial.

Federal Court Mere disregard of technicality without resulting injustice not enough for interference by, in criminal cave.

When competent and desirable-Federal Court not a Court of Criminal Appeal-Presentation of petitions indiscriminately deprecated.

Federal Court Criminal appeal-Whether and when would Federal Court itself scrutinise evidence after part of it had been ruled out of consideration-Evidence Act (I of 1872), S. 167-Whether applicable to Federal Court.

Holding important part of evidence against accused inadmissible.-Whether would examine remaining evidence to form its own estimate of it.

Additional evidence-Whether admissible-Report by certain officers based on documents and statements of persons not examined on authority of Federal Court Completely irrelevant.

Federal Court Grant of special leave .to appeal in criminal cases-Limitations on-No more and no less than those imposed on Privy Council Judicial Committee Act, 1833 (3 and 4 Will. 4, C. 41), S. 3-Privy Council (Abolition of jurisdiction) Act 1950, S. 3.-Limitations based on `administrative and constitutional' considerations.

Federal Court Practice-Criminal Appeal-Concurrent findings by High Court and trial Court-Whether Federal Court would examine evidence.

Federal Court No special leave to appeal to rectify technical error unless grave injustice caused thereby.

Federal Court Special leave to appeal granted-Petitioner not arrested for more than 5 months following High Court's order of conviction-Authorities' failure to arrest deprecated

Petitioner, however, directed not to be taken into custody pending decision of appeal.

Federal Court Not a Court to rectify technical errors

Federal Court Practice-Point whether sanction to prosecute 'was legally proved not raised before trial Court or Court of appeal or revision-Not to be allowed to be raised for first time before Federal Court-Question of sufficiency or insufficiency of evidence for conviction.-Not one to be agitated before Federal Court.

Federal Court Pot a Court of criminal appeal-Will not go into evidence over again.

Federal Court Petition for special leave to appeal-Appreciation of evidence or question of credit to be given to testimony of witnesses-Not to be gone into.

Questions of fact or lazy not raised in lower Court or High Court-Whether would be gone into by Federal Court.

Federal Court Revision Petition against order of acquittal in murder case dismissed by High Court-Whether petition for special leave to appeal lies.

Filing of without discrimination-Adversely remarked.

Would eliminate High Court judgment delivered in criminal appeal by Crown from consideration where Bench of High Court not properly constituted 'and would proceed as if appeal by Crown was being dealt with by itself.

Appeal from decision of Court-Martial -Whether competent- Government of India Act, 1935, S. 270 (1).

Bench of High Court not properly constituted-Federal Court would set aside order of High Court and decide appeal on merits.

Federal Court Interference with criminal sentence-When justified-"Something so irregular or so outrageous as to shock very basis of justice"-Question whether right of private defence accrued to accused, one for final determination by Court of Criminal Appeal.

Federal Court Federal Court-Obiter dicta of-Whether binding on High Court.

Whether has jurisdiction to grant special leave to appeal from decision of General Court Martial. (Quarae).