DAULAT vs MOHABBAT And 6 Other
This criminal revision petition was filed by the complainant under the Criminal Procedure Code to challenge the acquittal of the respondents on the benefit of the doubt by an Additional Sessions Judge in a murder trial, while their co-accused Nasir was sentenced to death. When confronted with the implication that succeeding in the revision would entail a retrial of the convicted co-accused along with the respondents, the petitioner's counsel chose to withdraw the revision petition. However, the counsel requested permission to participate and present arguments on behalf of the complainant in the pending criminal appeal of the condemned co-accused before the Division Bench. The Lahore High Court held that the request was in consonance with the dictates of Shariah, which enjoys supremacy under section 3 of the Enforcement of Shariah Act, 1991, as Shariah recognizes and gives preference to individual rights over state authority. The court consequently dismissed the criminal revision as withdrawn while allowing the complainant's counsel the right to oppose the convict's appeal before the Division Bench.
- Can a criminal revision against acquittal be withdrawn by the complainant?
- Does the Enforcement of Shariah Act, 1991 allow a complainant to participate and argue in a criminal appeal against conviction?
- Does Shariah give preference to individual rights over the authority of the State according to the Enforcement of Shariah Act, 1991?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 3, Enforcement of Shariah Act 1991
ORDER
The respondents along with Nasir co-accused were tried by a learned Additional Sessions Judge at Sheikhupura on the charge of committing murder and vide his judgment, dated 12-2-1991, where Nasir co-accused was convicted, under section 302, P.P.C. And sentenced to death besides some fine and imprisonment in lieu thereof, the respondents were acquitted on benefit of doubt.
2. By this criminal revision the petitioner, who is complainant in the case, calls in question the order of their acquittal. The learned counsel for the petitioner while confronted with the situation that if he presses this criminal revision against the acquittal of the respondents, the same, if it ultimately succeeded, shall entail not only their retrial but also that of their co-accused Nasir, who stands sentenced to death, he has chosen to withdraw it. He, however, requests that he may be allowed to participate in the arguments to be A addressed in the criminal appeal of Nasir before the Division Bench' on behalf of the complainant.
3. This request appears to be in consonance with the dictates of Shariah which is now supreme law of the land by virtue of section 3 of the Enforcement of Shariah Act, 1991. It not only recognizes the right of an individual but also gives it preference over the right or authority of the State and its functionaries.
He shall, therefore, be well within his rights to oppose the appeal of Nasir convict before the Division Bench on behalf of the complainant.
3. With the above observations the criminal revision is dismissed as withdrawn.
M.B.A./D-2/L
Cited by 3 cases
- Agha NADIM and another vs THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION, LOHARI GATE, LAHORE and anothers 1998 P Cr. L J 181
- Rana GHULAM MUSTAFA vs STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION CIVIL 2008 PLD Lahore 110
- Rana GHULAM MUSTAFA vs S.H.O. POLICE STATION, CIVIL LINES, LAHORE and 2 PLJ 2009 Cr.C. (Lahore) 88