| Case ID |
100ee5c2-6bfe-4b68-b10e-5e546ee253a0 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Cr. Revision No. 9 of 2016 |
| Decision Date |
Aug 03, 2016 |
| Hearing Date |
Aug 03, 2016 |
| Decision |
The Supreme Court allowed the revision petition filed by Bashrat Ali and Abdul Khaliq, setting aside the trial court's decision that had previously charged the petitioner and the SHO with causing the disappearance of evidence under sections 201 and 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The appellate court recognized the local customs in District Diamer, where it is customary to refuse post-mortem examinations, and ruled that in such contexts, the non-performance of a post-mortem does not undermine the prosecution's case. Consequently, the court dismissed the charges against the petitioner and the SHO, emphasizing the importance of considering cultural practices in legal proceedings and ensuring that judicial decisions are both fair and culturally sensitive. |
| Summary |
In the case of Cr. Revision No. 9 of 2016, decided on August 3, 2016, the Supreme Court of Pakistan addressed the legal complexities surrounding the refusal to conduct a post-mortem examination due to local customs in District Diamer. The petitioners, Bashrat Ali and Abdul Khaliq, challenged the trial court's decision to charge them along with the SHO, Malik Sherbaz, under sections 201 and 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code for causing the disappearance of evidence by not performing a post-mortem on the deceased, Mehfoozullah. The court meticulously analyzed the cultural context, acknowledging that in certain regions like Kohistan and Diamer, it is customary for legal heirs to decline post-mortem examinations. This practice, deeply rooted in local traditions, was considered by the Supreme Court as a valid reason for not conducting the examination, thereby not impeding the prosecution's case based on the available evidence. The court emphasized the necessity of aligning legal procedures with cultural practices to ensure justice is both served and perceived as fair by the local populace. By setting aside the trial court's order, the Supreme Court reinforced the importance of judicial sensitivity to regional customs and highlighted the role of corroborative medical evidence in lieu of post-mortem findings. This landmark decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to balancing legal rigor with cultural respect, ensuring that the legal system remains both effective and just across diverse societal landscapes. |
| Court |
|
| Entities Involved |
Amaldar,
Subedar,
Mehfoozullah,
Azam Khan,
Bakder Khan,
Hazrath Bilal,
Hazrath Noor
|
| Judges |
Malik Haq Nawaz, Justice
|
| Lawyers |
Not available
|
| Petitioners |
Abdul Khaliq,
Bashrat Ali
|
| Respondents |
Dy. A.G.,
Malik Sherbaz
|
| Citations |
2017 SLD 2623,
2017 PCRLJ 544
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860,
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
|
| Sections |
201,
302,
435,
439
|