• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Trending:
  • Kashmir
  • Elections
Tuesday, June 9, 2026

Daily Times

Your right to know

  • HOME
  • Latest
  • Iran-Israel war
  • Gilgit Baltistan Election
  • Pakistan
    • Balochistan
    • Gilgit Baltistan
    • Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
    • Punjab
    • Sindh
  • World
  • Editorials & Opinions
    • Editorials
    • Op-Eds
    • Commentary / Insight
    • Perspectives
    • Cartoons
    • Letters to the Editor
    • Featured
    • Blogs
      • Pakistan
      • World
      • Lifestyle
      • Culture
      • Sports
  • Business
  • Sports
  • E-PAPER
    • Lahore
    • Islamabad
    • Karachi

By Syed Sabeeh

SC dismisses appeals of 16 convicted terrorists

Published on: August 30, 2016 1:25 AM

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has dismissed the judicial reviews filed by 16 different terrorists against military court judgments. The military court awarded the 16 petitioners death sentences after finding them guilty of carrying out different terroractivities in the country including the brutal carnage at Army Public School in December 2014, the Bannu Jail Break and other terrorism-related incidents. The judicial reviews filed by terrorists were on three basic law-grounds including coram non judice (not before the judge), malafide (Malice in law) and denial of fair trial envisaged under article 10-A of the Constitution.

“It now stands clarified that neither the High Court nor this Court can sit in appeal over the findings of the FGCM or undertake an exercise of analysing the evidence produced before it or dwell into the “merits” of the case,” now the top court observed in its ruling. A larger bench of the top court, headed by Chief Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali and comprising Justice Amir Hani Muslim, Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed, Justice Manzoor Ahmed Malik and Justice Faisal Arab heard the cases of 16 judicial reviews.

The 16 terrorist who had filed their pleas through their relatives included Bacha Laiq, Anwar Bibi, Ali ur Rehman, Nek Maro, Said Zaman Khan, Sakhi Muhammad, Sher Alam, Mashooqa Bibi, Ajab Gul, Khan Afsar , Javed Iqbal Ghauri, Mohibullah, Fazal Ghafar, Zarba Khela, Aqsan Mehboob, and Hafiz Muhammad Sadiq.

Senior lawyers of the Supreme Court including Asma Jehangir, Abdul Latif Afridi, Khalid Anwar Afridi, Naseemullah Khan, Ahmed Nawaz Chaudhry, Malik Muhammad Akram, Salahuddin Mengal and Ahmed Raza Kasuri had represented the family members of convicts. Bacha Laiqa, mother of Haider Ali, had contended that her son was a minor at the time of the alleged crime; therefore he could not be awarded death sentence under juvenile justice. This had also invited the attention of international community.

However, the top court noted that the entry of his Birth Certificate was inserted in the record after the Writ Petition had been filed before the Peshawar High Court and many decades after the alleged birth of the Convict Haider Ali. “The other documents were private documents, having no evidentiary significance. We are not persuaded to interfere in the said findings,” the top court observed.

A 182 paged judgment authored by Justice Sheikh Azmat Saeed ruled that it is settled law that while exercising the power of Judicial Review in matters of this nature, neither the learned High Court nor this Court could sit in appeal over the conclusion drawn by the FGCM or analyze the evidence produced before it. The top court observed that a perusal of the record of the FGCM reveals that in order to ensure a fair trial and to protect the rights of the Convict, the relevant Rules were complied with. The Summary of evidence had been taken and was laid before the FGCM, as is apparent from the record of the proceedings thereof.

The top court further observed that at no point of time during the course of the trial by the FGCM or the pendency of the proceedings before the High Court were any allegations of specific mala fides of fact made against the Members of the FGCM. It said that the convicts were subject to the Pakistan Army Act 1952 as amended by the Pakistan Army (Amendment) Act, 2015 and liable to be tried and the offence was liable to be tried by the FGCM. Hence, the proceedings are not without jurisdiction.

The court declared that this was not a case of ‘no evidence’ or ‘insufficient evidence’ and the amendment in the constitution and PAA were in view of particular circumstance. The judgment noted the convicts were members of religiously motivated terrorist organisations and were involved in attacking the armed forces and the law enforcement agencies and causing death of civilians, several soldiers and officials.

Filed Under: Islamabad

Submit a Comment




Primary Sidebar




Latest News

Senate beats austerity target by 500pc

Qureshi warns over Pakistan’s GSP+ future

Kim visits missile factory, issues directive

Kangana comments on women’s representation debate

Indus water sharing dispute draws global concern

Pakistan

Senate beats austerity target by 500pc

Qureshi warns over Pakistan’s GSP+ future

Indus water sharing dispute draws global concern

Normalcy returns to rawalakot muzaffarabad after security operation

Protests erupt over delayed gilgit baltistan election results amid tensions

More Posts from this Category

Business

Pakistan, Mauritius explore new trade opportunities

Federal psdp allocates Rs252bn for provinces and special areas

Food security industry face major funding gap in new budget

NEC meeting delayed as government PPP budget talks continue

Budget 2026-27 may be delayed to June 12

More Posts from this Category

World

Kim visits missile factory, issues directive

Indus water sharing dispute draws global concern

India detains and deports 5,000 Bangladeshis

More Posts from this Category




Footer

Home
Lead Stories
Latest News
Editor’s Picks

Culture
Life & Style
Featured
Videos

Editorials
OP-EDS
Commentary
Advertise

Cartoons
Letters
Blogs
Privacy Policy

Contact
Company’s Financials
Investor Information
Terms & Conditions

Facebook
Twitter
Instagram
Youtube

© 2026 Daily Times. All rights reserved.

Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes. The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
  • Manage options
  • Manage services
  • Manage {vendor_count} vendors
  • Read more about these purposes
View preferences
  • {title}
  • {title}
  • {title}
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.