Citation Name: 2025 PLD 368 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ASSAD NAEEM vs State Ss

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Citation Name: 2025 PLD 368 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ASSAD NAEEM VS State Ss. 3 & 7---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 549---Pakistan Army Act (VI of 1953), S. 123---Illegal dispossession---Concurrent jurisdiction of Criminal Court and Court Martial---Delivery to military authorities of persons liable to be tried by Court-martial---Scope---Application was filed by the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) contending that the respondent/proposed accused was an officer in PAF, therefore, he be handed over to PAF as he was to be tried by the Military Courts instead of Courts of ordinary jurisdiction---Such application was dismissed by the Trial Court---Validity---It was evident that Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005,was a special law and S. 4 thereof contained non-obstante clause---Relevant provisions of PAF Act, 1953, envisaged that S. 123 of the said Act is not applicable to the special laws---In that context, reference could be made to the provision of Ss. 71, 4(xi), 4(xvi) & 123 of PAF Act, 1953---In view of this legal position, the provisions of Ss. 3 & 4 of the Illegal Dispossession Act, 2005, shall prevail over the provision of S. 123 of PAF Act, 1953---Applicant had mainly stressed their prayer on the basis of decision of Cabinet Division as reflected in the Letter No. 556/ Rule-19/2024/926 dated 07-11-2024---Prior to such decision of Cabinet Division, applications had been moved by the PAF for transferring the trial to Military/Court Martial which were dismissed and the dismissal orders were not challenged before the higher forum---When the trial was in progress and the complainant and one witness had been examined before the Trial Court, the applicant/PAF came with such plea that in view of the decision of the Cabinet Division, the Trial Court had no jurisdiction and that the trial of the accused was to be conducted by the Military/Martial Court---In fact, Federal Cabinet decision's letter No.556/ Rule-19/2024/926 dated 07-11-2024 was based on the provisions of S. 124 (2) of PAF Act 1953, and R. 6(2) of Criminal Procedure (Military Offender) Rules, 1970, which were not attracted in the present case as this case was governed under the provision of S. 123 of PAF Act, 1953, read with Rr. 2 & 3 of Criminal Procedure (Military Offender) Rules,1970---Moreover, in the said letter no reference had been made to the judicial order passed by the Trial Court on 01-11-2021 in which the question of jurisdiction had already been decided and the said order was not challenged before high forum, as such the same attained finality---Moreover, said letter regarding decision of Cabinet Division was quite silent with regard to judicial orders, as such the same had no value in the eye of law--- In the circumstances, the prayer sought by PAF for handing over the case/trial of accused to Military/Martial-Court would be violative of the principle "nemo debet esse judex in propria sua causa" (no one should be judge of his own cause)---Petition filed by PAF was dismissed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2025 PLD 368 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBookmark this Case ASSAD NAEEM vs State Ss — 2025 PLD 368 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLD