Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

BARKAT ALI versus STATE


Rules of the Supreme Court, O XXVI, r 5 Review, Application for Request for Review, In addition to the special leave of the special court, any other lawyer may be removed by the Advocate who has appeared at the hearing of the case, decision or order. That has been tried for review. The Advocate must also, as long as matters are dealt with his presence, the lawyer should be present at the hearing of the petition for review, which excludes anyone other than the Advocate's hearing of the leave application. was done.

1972 S C M R 470

Present : Sajjad Ahmad, Waheeduddin Ahmad and Salahuddin Ahmed, JJ

BARKAT ALI‑Petitioner

versus

THE STATE‑Respondent

Criminal Review Petition No. 3 of 1972 in P. S. L. A No. 262 of 1971, decided on 2nd November 1972.

(On review from the judgment and order of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, dated the 4th April 1972, in Petition No. 26: of 1971).

Supreme Court Rules,

O. XXVI, r. S‑Review, application for‑No application for review, except with special leave of Court can be drawn by any Advocate other than one who appeared at hearing of case, judgment or order whereof is sought to be reviewed‑Such Advocate must also, unless his presence dispenses with, be present at hearing of application for review‑Review petition drawn by Advocate other than one who conducted leave petition dismissed.

Malik Saeed Hassan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Abdul Karim, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Nemo for the State.

Date of hearing;: 2nd October 1972.

ORDER

WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, J.‑

This is a review petition against the order of this Court in Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 262 of 1971, dated the 4th April 1972. The petition was dismissed.

It appears from the record that Mr. K. H. Khurshid argued the above petition and under the rules except with the special leave of the Court, no application can be drawn by any Advocate other than the Advocate who appeared at the hearing of the case in which the judgment or order, sought to be reviewed, was made. It is also provided that such Advocate shall, unless his presence has been dispensed with, be present at the hearing of the applica tion for review. In this connection, reference may be made to Order XXVI, rule 5 of the Pakistan Supreme Court Rules.

In the present case, it is admitted by Mr. Saeed Hassan that the petition was drawn by him. It was not drawn by Mr. K. H. Khurshid who conducted the leave petition. Mr. K. H. Khurshid is also not present today. In these circumstances, the review petition is against the rules and is liable to be dismissed. We would, therefore, dismiss the review petition.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
law firms from Mardan lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.