FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and another vs N.W.F.P. GOVERNMENT and others
This matter concerns a review petition regarding the enforcement of Islamic laws of Qisas and Diyat. Following a statement by the Attorney-General, the Supreme Court addressed the timeline for the promulgation and implementation of the Ordinance relating to Qisas and Diyat. The Court held that the Ordinance must be promulgated by 5th September 1990 and fully enforced by 12th Rabi-ul-Awwal 1411 A.H. The Court further ordered that the previous decision declaring certain existing provisions repugnant to the injunctions of Islam would take effect on 12th Rabi-ul-Awwal 1411 A.H., at which point those repugnant provisions shall cease to have effect. Crucially, the Court established that if the new law is not enacted or lapses, a legal vacuum shall not exist; instead, the common Islamic law and injunctions of Islam regarding Qatl and Jurh (hurt) as contained in the Qur'an and Sunnah shall immediately become the applicable law, with the Pakistan Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code applied mutatis mutandis to facilitate the administration of justice.
- What is the legal consequence if the Ordinance for Qisas and Diyat is not enacted or lapses by the specified deadline?
- Can the common Islamic law/injunctions of Islam be applied directly in the absence of statutory law regarding Qatl and Jurh?
- Does the Pakistan Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code remain applicable in the event of a statutory vacuum regarding Qisas and Diyat?
- Can the Court extend the effective date of a declaration of repugnancy to allow for the implementation of new legislation?
- Pakistan Penal Code
- Criminal Procedure Code
ORDER
1. ' The learned Attorney-General has made a statement before us that the Ordinance relating to enforcement of the provisions of Qisas and Diyat has been drafted and is at present in the process of final scrutiny which should be completed within a couple of days and the necessary Ordinance promulgated by 5th September, 1990. He has further stated that to familiarise the enforcement agencies with the new provisions and to ensure their proper implementation the provisions of the proposed Ordinance shall he enforced by 12th Rabi-ul-Awwal 1411 A.H. He has prayed that the Review Petition may he disposed of in the light of his above statement, as it has become infructuous.
2. 'We consider that in view of the importance of the subject and to prevent any chaos and disruptiiin in the administration of criminal justice some time should be allowed to educate and familiarise the enforcement agencies with the new provisions. We, therefore, accept the submission of the learned Attorney-General.
3. ' The new Ordinance incorporating the provisions relating to Qisas and Diyat shall be promulgated by 5th September, 1990 and all the provisions thereof shall be enforced at the latest by 12th Rabi- ul-Awwal 1411 A.H.
4. ' Accordingly, it is ordered that the decision of this Court dated 5th July, 1989, whereby the provisions declared and held therein as repugnant to the injunctions of Islam, and which was to take effect on 23rd March, 1990, would now, on the disposal of this Review Petition, shall take effect on 12th day of Rabi-ul-Awwal 1411 A.H.; on which day the said provisions to the extent they have been declared and held to be repugnant to the injunctions of Islam, shall cease to have effect.
5. ' It is also held and ordered that even if the required law is not enacted and/or enforced by 12th of Rabi-ul-Awwal 1411 A.H., the said provisions would nevertheless cease to have effect on 12th Rabi- ul-Awwal. In such state of vacuum, vis-a-vis, the statute law on the subject, the common Islamic law/the injunctions of Islam as contained in the Qur'an and Sunnah relating to the offence of Qatl and Jurh (hurt) shall he deemed to be the law on the subject. The Pakistan Penal Code and the Criminal Procedure Code shall then be applied mutatis mutandis, only as aforestated. The same will be the position if an Ordinance for the law of Qisas and Diyat is enforced on or before 12th Rabi- ul-Awwal and the same lapses or otherwise becomes unenforceable due to any reason, creating a similar vacuum in the statute law on the subject. In the aforevisualised situations, the Courts, while hearing and deciding the cases of Qatl and Jurh (hurt) in accordance with common Islamic law/injunctions of Islam as contained in Qura'an and Sunnah may also seek guidance from the provisions of the aforementioned Ordinance if it, in the meanwhile, having once been enforced, had lapsed or otherwise had become un-enforceable. All these matters stand disposed of.
Cited by 35 cases
- BAKHTIAR ALI and another vs The STATE 2016 YLR 2536
- SARDAR KHAN vs The STATE and anothers 2013 P Cr. L J 816
- ASGHAR ALI and another vs STATE PLJ 2011 Cr.C. (Lahore) 728
- ISRAR ALI vs STATE 2007 PLJ SC 489
- ISRAR ALI vs THE STATE 2007 SCMR 525
- REHMAT ALI vs THE STAT and 4 others 2002 MLD 918
- Mst. HANIFAN BIBI and another vs ZULFIQAR and another 2001 PLD Lahore 123
- SIKANDAR SHAH and another vs THE STATE 2000 P Cr. L J 1962
- MUHAMMAD YOUSUF vs THE STATE 2000 PLD Karachi 94
- MAHMOOD AKHTAR vs THE STATE 1999 MLD 1206
- IFTIKHAR ALI vs THE STATE 1998 P Cr. L J 2022
- SAMBALI KHAN vs THE STATE 1998 PLD Peshawar 101
- MUHAMMAD IQBAL and 3 others vs Mst. REHMAT BIBI through Legal Heirs 1998 CLC 11
- MANZOOR AHMAD and anothers vs THE STATE 1997 P Cr. L J 850
- NOOR BEGUM vs MUHAMMAD BOOTA and 3 others 1995 PLD Lahore 344
- PASHAM KHAN vs THE STATE And Another 1995 MLD 1210
- ABDUL KHAN and 2 others vs THE STATE and another 1995 PLD Quetta 12
- MUHAMMAD YOUSAF vs KHUDA BAKHSH through Legal Heirs 1994 PLD Lahore 263
- HABIB-UL-WAHAB-AL KHAR1 vs MIAN MANZOOR AHMAD WATTOO And Other K.L.R. 1994 Civil Cases 28
- ALJEHAD TRUST and anothers vs Mian MANZOOR AHMAD WATTOO and 8 1993 PLD Lahore 875
- GHULAM HAMDANI vs MUHAMMAD IQBAL and 9 others 1993 SCMR 1083
- RJAZ AHMED vs THE STATE 1998 SCMR 1729
- MANSOOR ALI BABAR and 5others vs THE STATE 2000 MLD 1020
- UNITED BANK LTD., KARACHI vs Messrs GRAVURE PACKAGING (PVT.) LTD. and 4 others 2001 YLR 1549
- UMAR MUJEEB SHAMI vs DISTRICT MAGISTRATE_DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, ISLAMABAD and 2 others 2003 CLC 430
- Sardar Khan Niazi vs Province of Sindh through Secretary, Information 2008 C.L.R. 556
- ASGHAR ALI and another vs THE STATE 2010 P Cr. L J 1523
- MUHAMMAD FAROOQ through Legal Heirs and others vs MUHAMMAD 2013 SCMR 225
- MANZOOR HUSSAIN vs FEROZ KHAN and another 2017 YLR 327
- AZIZULLAH MEMON, ADVOCATE Versus PAKISTAN 1992 PLD 1
- MUHAMMAD ISMAIL QURESHI Versus GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB 1991 PLD 80
- ABDUL MALIK Versus THE STATE 1996 PLD 1
- GULBAR Versus THE STATE 2002 PLD 65
- ZAFAR ALI SHAH Versus PERVEZ MUSHARRAF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF PAKISTAN 2000 PLD 869
- YAQOOB Versus STATE 2000 MLD 425