Pakistan Case Law
1971 SCMR 703

ASGHAR vs The STATE

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1971 SCMR 703
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 111 of 1970 Review Petition .
Judge(s)Muhammad Yaqub Ali, Sajjad Ahmad and Waheeduddin Ahmad
Authored bySajjad Ahmad
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This review petition was filed against the Supreme Court's order dismissing Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 111 of 1970. The petitioner's counsel argued that the courts, including the Supreme Court, had misjudged the petitioner's defense as one of self-defense rather than grave and sudden provocation. The core legal question was whether a review could be granted on the basis of a newly introduced plea of grave and sudden provocation that was never originally contemplated by the petitioner. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the contention was entirely misconceived and imaginatively introduced by counsel for the first time. The Court reaffirmed the principle that a review petition cannot be entertained where no error apparent on the face of the record is disclosed, and warned counsel against filing frivolous review petitions without merit.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can a review petition be granted based on a new plea raised for the first time by counsel?
  • What constitutes an error apparent on the face of the record for the purpose of reviewing a Supreme Court judgment?
  • Whether a review lies when no error of law or fact is disclosed in the original judgment?
review petitionerror apparent on face of recordgrave and sudden provocationself-defencefrivolous petitionspecial leave to appeal

1. SAJJAD AHMAD, J.-This is a petition far review of our order dated the 27th of May 1970, whereby we had dismissed the petitioner's criminal petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 111 of 1970. The point urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the review petition is that all the Courts, including this Court, have misjudged the plea of the petitioner as of self-defence, which was really that of grave and sudden provocation. This is entirely a misconceived contention, which has been Imaginatively introduced by the learned counsel for the first time, and seems never to have been in the contemplation of the petitioner himself.

2. No error is disclosed in the impugned judgment, muchless any error apparent on the face of the record. This is patently al frivolous petition, and the learned counsel should take care not to file such review petitions in future. The petition is dismissed.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.