SHARAF KHAN vs The STATE
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by Sharaf Khan against the dismissal of his appeal and the confirmation of his death sentence for murder under section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question raised was whether the trial court's alleged failure to inform the military authorities about the trial of a member of the Defence Forces vitiated the entire trial. The Supreme Court held that this hyper-technical plea, never raised before the trial court or the High Court, could not be permitted for the first time at the leave to appeal stage, especially when there was no record showing the military authorities were unaware of the detention. The petition was consequently dismissed, upholding the conviction and sentence.
- Whether a hyper-technical plea not raised before the trial court or the High Court can be permitted for the first time at the leave to appeal stage?
- Does the omission to inform military authorities about the trial of a member of the Defence Forces automatically vitiate the trial?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.--Sharif Khan petitioner was tried along with two others for the murder of Murad. His co-accused were acquitted by the trial Court but he was convicted under section 302, P.P.C. And was sentenced to death and a fine of Rs.6,000 (2 years' R.I. In default of payment of fine).
His appeal was dismissed by the High Court and the death sentence was confirmed.
2. Feeling aggrieved he has filed the present petition for leave to appeal against his conviction and sentence.
3. Before us the learned counsel for the petitioner has not pressed the petition on merits but has only raised the plea that under the law the trial Court was bound to inform the military authorities that a member of the Defence Forces was being tried of the offence in question. He urged that because of this omission the whole trial stood vitiated and as such the petitioner deserves to be let off.
4. This hyper-technical plea was never taken up by the petitioner either before the trial Court or the High Court and he cannot, therefore, be permitted to raise this plea at this late stage. Moreover, there is nothing on the record to show that the military authorities were not informed about the trial of a member of the Defence Forces and we assume that his lengthy absence must have been noticed by his regimental officers, in case they had not been informed by the civil authorities of his detention in connection with an offence under section 302, P.P.C. And that they would, then, have certainly made an inquiry as to his whereabouts and thereby got to know that he was being tried for the offence in question. This plea has, therefore, no force.
The petition is consequently dismissed.