ATA MUHAMMAD AND Another vs The STATE
This matter concerns a petition for review filed against a judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan dated 12th November 1969, which had previously dismissed the petitioners' criminal appeal against their convictions and death sentences for the murder of one Allah Dita. The core legal question was whether the petitioners had established grounds for a review of the earlier judgment, specifically whether there was any error apparent on the face of the record. The Court held that the petition was merely an attempt to re-canvass evidence that had already been duly considered and determined in the original appeal. Finding no error apparent on the face of the record as required by the applicable rules, the Court dismissed the review petition. The key principle laid down is that a review petition cannot be utilized as a mechanism to re-argue or re-examine evidence already adjudicated upon, and must strictly demonstrate an error apparent on the face of the record to succeed.
- Can a review petition be used to re-canvass evidence already considered and determined in an appeal?
- What is the threshold requirement for maintaining a review petition under the Supreme Court Rules?
- Rule 1, Order XXVI, Supreme Court Rules 1956
ORDER
1. SAJJAD AHMAD, J.-This petition seeks a review of the judgment of this Court dated the 12th of November 1969, made in Criminal Appeal No. 16 of 1969, whereby the appeal of the petitioners against their convictions and sentences of death as affirmed by the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, for the murder of one, Allah Dita, was dismissed. The petition is merely an effort to re- canvass some points arising in the evidence led in the case which were duly considered and determined. No error, much less any error apparent on the face of the record, is disclosed in the impugned judgment, as required by rule 1, Order XXVI of this Court's Rules as amended, for purposes of review. There is no substance in this review petition which is dismissed.