PROVINCE OF SINDH Versus PUBLIC AT LARGE
This judgment concerns appeals filed under Article 203-F of the Constitution against two judgments of the Federal Shariat Court. The Federal Shariat Court, exercising its suo motu jurisdiction under Article 203-D, had declared certain provisions of the Sind Provincial Assembly Members Privileges Act XI of 1975 and the Baluchistan Chief Minister and Provincial Ministers (Salaries, Allowances and Privileges) Act III of 1975 repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam. The core legal questions involved the validity of a provision staying court proceedings when an Assembly Member is a party, and the validity of provisions allowing compensation upon death to nominees instead of legal heirs. The Supreme Court noted that cases involving the same subject-matter had previously been decided and remanded to the Federal Shariat Court. To avoid conflict of judgment, achieve consistency, and ensure observance of rules laid down in the earlier reported judgment, the Supreme Court accepted these appeals and remanded the cases to the Federal Shariat Court.
- Can a provision staying court proceedings involving an Assembly Member be held repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam?
- Can provisions allowing compensation upon death to nominees instead of legal heirs be held repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam?
- Under what circumstances will the Supreme Court remand cases to the Federal Shariat Court to ensure consistency with prior judgments?
- What is the scope of the Federal Shariat Court's suo motu jurisdiction under Article 203-D of the Constitution?
- What is the effect of a Supreme Court decision to remand a case to the Federal Shariat Court?
- Can a law granting privileges to assembly members that interfere with the administration of justice be considered repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam?
- Article 203-F, Constitution of Pakistan
- Article 203-D, Constitution of Pakistan
- Section 6, The Sind Provincial Assembly Members Privileges Act XI of 1975
- The Baluchistan Chief Minister and Provincial Ministers (Salaries, Allowances and Privileges) Act III of 1975
- The Baluchistan Speakers and Deputy Speakers (Salaries, Allowances and Privileges) Act V of 1975
1. JUSTICE MUHAMMAD .AFZAL ZULLAH (CHAIRMAN).‑‑These appeals under Article 203‑F of the Constitution are directed against two judgments of the Federal Shariat Court; whereby in suo motu exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 203‑D of the Constitution, some of the provisions of certain laws specified in the chart on next page were held to be repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam and, therefore, these provisions were ordered to be omitted /amended.
2. The questions raised in these appeals were also raised in the case, the appeals wherein have already been decided by this Court and reported in Pakistan v. Public at Large P L D 1986 SC 240. The subject‑matter of appeal No.23 of 1984 filed by the Province of Sind is mentioned in Schedule‑I to the aforenoted reported judgment at page 261, Serial No.l, item No.2 and the subject‑matter of appeal No.28 of 1984 filed by the Province of Baluchistan has been noted in the same Schedule at page 265, Serial No. 1, item No.4(iv).
3. Although, the nomenclature of the laws in these appeals and those referred in the decided appeals are different but the subject matter is the same as is apparent from the following chart:
4. S. A. No. 23 of 1984
5. Law Provisions Reasons given by Federal Order
6. Shariat Court for repug‑ suggesting nancy to Injunctions of change
7. I slam
8. The Sind Section 6 provides A similar question about Section 6 of
9. Provincial for stay of the the validity of similar the Act shall
10. Assembly proceedings of provision regarding the be omitted.
11. Members Civil or Revenue holding up of Court pro
12. Privileges Courts or any ceedings came up before
13. Act XI of Commission in the Court in SSM No. 196
14. 1975 which a Member of 1983. It was held that of the Assembly is this was undue inter a party, for a ference with the adminis period of 14 days tration of justice.The before and 14 days member may not appear after the session in Court but there is no unless the privilege reason for staying the is waived, in proceedings of the Court writing. during the session of the
15. Assembly or 14 days before or 14 days after. "The above sections give a handle to the Member of the Assembly to hold up
16. ................. the proceedings of the
17. Court".
18. S. A. No. 28 of 1984
19. The Balu‑ The provision pro‑ The question whether in To amend the chistan vides for compen‑ case of death the compen‑ respective
20. Chief sation in case of ..... sation can be paid to the provision in
21. Minister death, to any per‑ nominees or to the legal each of the and Pro‑ son or persons heirs having already been acts so as to vincial of the family or if considered, it was held provide that
22. Ministers there is no such that provisions about pay‑ the nominee
23. (Salaries, member to any ment of the compensation shall disburse
24. Allowances other person or to nominee, as such are, the amount and Privi‑ persons as may be repugnant to the Injunc‑ between the leges) Act nominated by the tions of Islam. heirs in cases
25. III of 1975 Minister and Spea‑ where it is
26. The Balu‑ ker as the case may Note.‑There is no such paid to the chistan be, in this behalf provision in the Baluchis‑ said
27. Speakers and in the absence tan Speakers and Deputy nominee. and Deputy of such nomina‑ Speakers (Salaries, Allow‑
28. Speakers tion, to his heirs. ances and Privileges) Act
29. (Salaries, V of 1975.
30. Allowances and Privi leges) Act
31. V of 1975.
32. The cases involving the same subject‑matter, as is involved in these appeals, having been remanded to the Federal Shariat Court, we deem it fit, in the circumstances, to remand these cases also so as to avoid conflict of judgment, achieve consistency and for the observance of the rules laid down in the reported judgment.
33. Appeals accordingly are accepted and the cases remanded. There shall be no order as to costs.
34. M.B.A. /P.27/S Appeal accepted.