BARKAT ALI vs The STATE
This matter arises from a review petition filed against the dismissal of a criminal petition for special leave to appeal by the Supreme Court of Pakistan. The core legal question concerns the procedural requirements for filing and arguing a review petition under the Pakistan Supreme Court Rules, specifically whether a review application can be drawn and presented by an advocate other than the one who conducted the original hearing without special leave, and whether the original advocate must be present. The Court held that the review petition violated the mandatory procedural rules as it was neither drawn by the advocate who conducted the earlier leave petition nor was that advocate present at the hearing. Consequently, the Court dismissed the review petition, establishing that strict adherence to the procedural rules governing review applications before the Supreme Court is mandatory.
- Can a review petition be drawn by an advocate other than the one who appeared at the hearing of the original case?
- Is the presence of the original advocate required at the hearing of a review application under the Pakistan Supreme Court Rules?
- What is the consequence of failing to comply with the procedural rules regarding the drafting and presentation of a review petition in the Supreme Court?
- Order XXVI Rule 5, Pakistan Supreme Court Rules
1. ORDER, WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, J.-This is a review .Petition against the order of this Court in Criminal Petition for Special Leave to appeal No. 262 of 1971, dated the 4th April, 1972. The petition was dismissed.
2. It appears from the record that Mr. K. H. Khurshid argued the above petition and under the rules except with the special leave of the Court, no' application can be drawn by any Advocate other than the Advocate who appeared at the hearing of the case in which the judgment or order, sought to be reviewed was made. It is also provided that such Advocate shall, unless his presence has been dispensed with, be present at the hearing of the application for review. In this connection re--ference may be made to Order XXVI, rule 5 of the Pakistan Supreme Court Rules.
3. In the present case, it is admitted by Mr. Saved Hassan that the Petition was drawn by him. It was not drawn by Mr. K. H.) Khurshid who conduced the leave petition. Mr. K. H. Khurshid is also not present today., :In these circumstances, the review petition is against the rules and is liable to be dismissed. We would, therefore, dismiss the review petition Review Petition dismissed.