Islamabad: All courts must analyze in each case whether they respected the accused’s right to a fair trial under Article 10A of the Constitution, the Supreme Court said on Monday.
“In adding this fundamental right to our constitution, the courts must analyze the facts and circumstances of the case to determine whether this indispensable right has been granted,” said Supreme Court Justice Muhammad Ali Mazar.
Two Justices, consisting of Supreme Court Justices Sardar Tariq Masood and Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar, accepted Sohail Ahmed’s appeal against the Federal Service Court on November 15, 2018.
The catchphrase ‘complete justice’ is in fact a broad and inclusive expression aimed at achieving justice at all costs, so that the principle of fairness is not undermined or distorted in mere technical terms.
The ruling, drafted by Supreme Court Justice Mazhar, emphasized the principle of natural justice that the courts must give the delinquent an opportunity to defend themselves and challenge the charges raised against them before adjudicating them in a case.
Through an executive order of August 16, 2017, the Frontier Constabulary took punitive action against Sohail Ahmed for misconduct and transferred him from Malakand to Daryoba.
As a further punishment, the appellant was declared the youngest in Daryoba’s platoon.
Sohail Ahmed appealed this decision to the department on January 3, 2018, and another appeal on August 16 of the same year, but the Frontier Constabulary did not respond to the appeal.
He then filed a complaint with the Federal Service Court, but dismissed the appeal on the grounds of restrictions without going to the heart of the case. Having exhausted all her options, Sohail Ahmed appealed to the Supreme Court.
According to Article 10A of the Constitution, the right to a fair trial is emphasized by precedents as a fundamental right.
It said that the basic rule of law is that decisions affecting an individual’s rights should not be taken without giving that person the opportunity to provide his or her version.
Similarly, the court added that Article 13 of the Constitution states that no one may be prosecuted or punished more than once for the same offense.
It is clear that the accused had been sentenced twice on the same charge of false accusations against colleagues, who were found not guilty by the investigation.
Transfer’s sentence falls within the scope of the double risk principle of declaring him a subordinate on the same charge, a legal defense to protect a person from being tried twice on the same charge after being acquitted or convicted. The Supreme Court observed.
Article 187 of the Constitution, the ruling was read, authorizing the Supreme Court to issue directives, orders or orders to ensure “full justice” in a case.
The Supreme Court canceled the transfer order, along with an order to reverse the seniority of Sohail Ahmed in the platoon.
However, the court made it clear that the Border Guard may issue a notice of clarification if there is an allegation of misconduct against the appellant, and may order a full-scale investigation if the answer is unsatisfactory.
Posted at Serb on June 21, 2022