Raja Farhat Iqbal vs The State
The applicant, who was acquitted of homicide by the trial court but subsequently convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment by the High Court of Sindh, sought to challenge his conviction. His appeal before the Supreme Court of Pakistan was withdrawn by his counsel in 2009, and his subsequent review petition was dismissed in 2019, partly because he had already been released on parole. The applicant filed a subsequent application (Cr.M.A. No. 1404 of 2019) challenging the office's refusal to entertain his request after the dismissal of his review petition. The Supreme Court held that the dismissal of a review petition forecloses all subsequent legal avenues for the applicant. Furthermore, the Court ruled that a client cannot escape the consequences of a course of action adopted by their duly engaged counsel simply by claiming they did not instruct the counsel to do so, especially after a significant delay. Consequently, the application was dismissed as hopelessly misconceived.
- Does the dismissal of a review petition by the Supreme Court foreclose all subsequent attempts and avenues for relief by an applicant?
- Can an applicant escape the legal consequences of a decision made by their duly engaged counsel on the ground that they did not instruct the counsel to take that course of action?
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J. Raja Farhat Iqbal, applicant herein, accused in a case of homicide, was acquitted by the trial Court; High Court of Sindh, however, reversed the findings and while returning a guilty verdict, sentenced him to imprisonment for life, vide judgment dated 28.12.2005, vires whereof were challenged through an appeal; the complainant dissatisfied with the quantum of sentence came up with a petition for enhancement of sentence, however, without success. It was on 25-3-2009 when applicant's learned counsel opted to withdraw the appeal, consequently dismissed; his subsequent attempt to seek a review of dismissal of his appeal failed on 12.3.2019; his failures, notwithstanding, he was released on parole way back on 24.1.2015 and it was one of the reasons that weighed with the Court to decline the review. The applicant has approached in person once again and was joined by Mr. Ghulam Sajjad Gopang, ASC during the proceedings; they are aggrieved by the office refusal to entertain their application on the ground that after dismissal of earlier review petition, there was no occasion to entertain the request and it is in this backdr op that the present application (Cr.M.A. No.1404 of 2019) has been posted before us.
2. Dismissal of review petition foreclosed avenues for subsequent attempts by the applicant and for that law is well settled by now. The applicant cannot escape the consequences of course adopted by his duly engaged counsel merely on the ground that he had not so instructed him, that too so late in the day. Being hopelessly misconceived, the instant application is dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.