Find a Lawyer

KHALIL UZ ZAMAN versus SUPREME APPELLATE COURT

Arts 184 (3), 4 (1) (2) (A) and 9 Conventional Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 302 (a), 306 (c) and 308 Special Court for Sharp Trials Act (IX of 1992), Both the Special Court and the Special Appellate Court for the human rights cases sections 8 and 13 had sentenced the death sentence to the accused, though he could not be sentenced to death in law because of his alleged crime. The relevant law did not provide any remedy through appeal / application for leave to appeal / revision / revision against the said order of the Supreme Appeal Court case, the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution. Was appropriate and appropriate to interfere with the use of, it contained the question. In accepting the application under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution, the public importance in regard to the enforcement of the fundamental rights granted by the Supreme Court of the Constitution has set aside the decision of the Supreme Appellate Court and the matter is referred to the relevant court. Has been sent for decision. Ordinance with the law, however, citing the Hadith of the Prophet Akram, was taken as a precautionary note to all the courts of the country, taking all precautions to deal with the life and liberty of the citizens, as they did little. Carelessness can lead to irreparable trouble and harm to the person / citizen and his / her family accused of life. advocate from Lawrence pur lawyer