Interpretation of Holy Quran
Interpretation of Holy Quran legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Principles.
Principles. It is one of the accepted principles of interpretation of the Holy Qur'an that firstly the Holy Our'an should be interpreted by the Holy Our'an itself. Therefore, for the correct interpretation of a verse in the Holy Our'an, the other verses of the Holy Qur'an, on the subject, must be looked into and taken together to find out the real intention of the Holy Qur'an and, then, the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet viz. his word, (Kool), act (fael)and maintaining silence on one's words spoken or act done in his presence by the Holy Prophet (Taqreer), be called in aid for its interpretation.
Principles.Bilal A. Khawaja for Plaintiff.Mumtaz Hussain for DefendantA.A. Mohammadally, Addl. A.-G. (on Court Notice)Dates of hearing: 25th May, 10th and 11th June, 1987.
Proposition that present day Courts should have no power or authority to interpret Qur'an to a way different from one adopted by earlier jurists and Imams-Cannot be laid down as a positive rule of law-Views of earlier jurists and Imams, however, entitled to utmost respect-Court or Commentator could differ only for very compelling and sound reasons.-[Muhammadan Law].
"Interpretation of Holy Quran", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/2869
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Interpretation of Holy Quran"
2013 C L C 1869
Dr. MAHMOOD-UR-REHMAN FAISAL and others — Petitioners Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Justice, Law and Parliamentary Affairs, Islamabad and others — Respondents
Court: Federal Shariat CourtP L D 2013 Federal Shariat Court 55
Dr. MAHMOOD-UR-REHMAN FAISAL and others — Petitioners Versus GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Justice, Law and Parliamentary Affairs, Islamabad and others — Respondents
Court: High Court2019 S C M R 64
MUHAMMAD MANSHA — Petitioner Versus The STATE — Respondent
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan1984 P T D 300
ABDUL RAZZAQ Versus DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT (PREV), CENTRAL EXCISE AND LAND CUSTOMS AND OTHERS,
Court: Karachi High CourtP L D 2017 Federal Shariat Court 12
DIRECTOR AND MEMBERS AL-QURAN RESEARCH ACADEMY, KHYBER BAZAR, PESHAWAR — Petitioner Versus FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Law Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Islamabad — Respondent
Court: High Court1982 P Cr
NISAR AHMED AND ANOTHER‑Appellants Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: Supreme Court (AJ&K)P L D 1988 Lahore 498
SHAISTA ARSHI‑‑Petitioner, Versus CHAIRMAN, UNION COMMITTEE, WARD No. 48, LAHORE and another‑‑Respondents
Court:1989 P T D 7
ABDUL RAZZAK Versus DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT (PREV). CENTRAL EXCISE AND LAND CUSTOMS, NAZIMABAD and others
Court: Karachi High CourtP L D 2011 Lahore 441
MUHAMMAD NAZIM-UD-DIN and others — Petitioners Versus FEDERAL SECRETARY and others — -Respondents
Court: ---Preamble---publication of Holy Quran (Elimination of Printing and Recording Errors) Rules, 1973, R.4---Constitution of Pakistan, Part-II, Chapter 2 Arts. 8 to 28, Arts. 29, 31 & 199---Constitutional petition-Principles of policy-Implementation-Publication of the Holy Quran---Grievance of petitioners was that authorities had not ensured printing of the Holy Quran on the best quality of paper and no arrangements were made for proper disposal of damaged papers of the Holy Quran--Plea raised by authorities was that correct printing of the Holy Quran was only a matter of Principle of Policy as envisaged in Art.31 contained in Part II, Chapter 2 of the Constitution and not enforceable by judicial process---Validity---Principles of Policy set out in Chapter 2 of Part-II of the Constitution were in fact the aspirations of the Constitution makers, which were intended to be considered as guiding principles of policy of the State---According to Art.31 of the Constitution, the State was to endeavour to secure correct and exact printing and publishers of the Holy Quran---Every organ of the State, under Art.29 of the Constitution, was conferred responsibility to act in accordance with Principles of Policy enshrined in Part-II, Chapter 2 of the Constitution---Constitutional obligation and commitment must be honoured to consolidate public confidence and non fulfilment of liabilities and obligations by the Government was violative of fundamental principles of policy guaranteed under the Constitution---Authorities were under a constitutional duty to secure correct and exact printing and publishing of the Holy Quran as provided in Art.31 of the Constitution--Law titled Punjab Holy Quran (Printing and Recording) Act, 2001, was enacted in the recent past and the rules under the same were yet to be made---High Court directed the Provincial Government to consider the proposals of petitioners in the Rule Framing process in the committee constituted by Chief Minister---Petition was disposed of accordingly.P L D 1989 Federal Shariat Court 39
Court: