MUJEEB-UR-RAHMAN versus FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN
Religious malpractice / prejudice Islamic custody of unjust justice challenged appellant's endorsement of ordinance (XX of 1984) Shariat Appellate Benchplay sought the expulsion of two learned Judges that they had expressed their opinion in favor of this law. Because it was like an expression of opinion. Temporarily and without even hearing the whole argument, it has never been dealt with because either prejudice, prejudice or restriction is being created, the integration of the Quran and the Sunnah into a particular situation is unwarranted. Emphasizing the importance of justice, it is not forbidden to take a trial and judgment against a self-styled Qur'an and it is not possible to hear it, even though such an extreme case can rarely happen, as both scholars judge. Has stated that they are not ashamed to sit on the bench; the appeal of the appellants was decided as a result of the dismissal. Removed from [Prejudice]
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
famous lower court advocate from Matiari lawyer
