D.-G. A.N.F. RAWALPINDI and others vs MUNAWAR HUSSAIN MANJ and others
This matter concerns the procedural validity and finality of a short order passed by a Bench of the Supreme Court of Pakistan when the detailed reasons were not subsequently rendered due to the retirement of the presiding judges. The core legal question was whether a short order, signed by the majority or all judges, constitutes a final judgment requiring no rehearing despite the absence of a detailed written judgment. The Supreme Court held that a short order signed by the hearing judges possesses the full legal effect of a final judgment. The Court affirmed that the absence of a subsequent detailed judgment does not invalidate the short order or necessitate a rehearing of the case. The key principle laid down is that a short order, once signed by the competent Bench, serves as a final disposition of the matter for all intents and purposes, and the failure to issue a detailed judgment later does not undermine its binding nature or require the case to be reopened.
- Does a short order signed by the judges of the Supreme Court constitute a final judgment if a detailed judgment is not subsequently rendered?
- Does the absence of a detailed judgment following a short order necessitate the rehearing of a case?
- What is the legal effect of a short order signed by the majority of the Bench hearing a matter?
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.---The captioned appeal and the jail petition had been heard by a Bench of three Hon'ble Judges of this Court on 11-11-2008 and through a short order passed on the same date the said appeal and the jail petition had been dismissed with slight modification that the convicts-petitioners were ordered to be extended the benefit under section 382-B, Cr.P.C. The said short order showed that a detailed judgment containing the reasons was to be followed but before such detailed judgment could be rendered all the three Hon'ble Judges mentioned above seized to hold their offices and that is why the office has fixed this appeal and the connected jail petition for rehearing before this Court today.
2. The law is quite settled by now that a short order passed by this Court has all the effects of a judgment of this Court if such short order has been signed by all or a majority of the Hon'ble Judges hearing the matter even if for some reason such order is not followed by a detailed judgment. A reference in this respect may be made to the cases of The State v. Asif Adil and others (1997 SCM R 209), Chief Justice of Pakistan lftikhar Muhammad Jhaudhry v. President of Pakistan through Secretary and others (PLD 2010 SC 61) and Dr. Agha Ijaz All Pathan v. The State (2010 SCM R 322). In the case in hand all the Hon'ble Judges hearing the above mentioned appeal and jail petition had signed the short order passed on 11-11-2008 and, thus, for all intents and purposes that has to be treated as a final disposition of the :aloye mentioned matters and absence of any detailed judgment does not require rehearing of the same. In these circumstances these matters are returned to the office.
Cited by 5 cases
- MUHAMMAD SALMAN vs ELECTION COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD 2019 CLC 1069
- Muhammad Salman vs Election Commission of Pakistan, Islamabad & 2019 LHC 329
- Abdul Sattar vs State 2019 PLD Sindh 418, 2018 SHC 1210
- Muhammad Jawad Hamid vs Mian Muhammad Nawaz Sharif, etc 2018 LHC 1465
- MUHAMMAD JAWAD HAMID Versus Mian MUHAMMAD NAWAZ SHARIF Rai Bashir Ahmad 2018 PLD 836