- Shariat Court — Period fixed by the Distrcit Qazi for payment of ‘Diyyat’ already expired — Held: It was necessary for the Shariat Court to fix fresh period for payment of ‘Diyyat’ — Period fixed by the Supreme Court. Noor Ahmad v. The State 1992 SCR 1 (H)
- Definition of — Separate sentences of ‘Diyyat’ cannot be awarded for the destruction etc of more than one limbs. The minimum amount of ‘Diyyat’ in case of cutting of or destroying the limbs has been fixed weighing 2916 tolas and 3 mashaz but no maximum limit has been fixed, at the same time separate amounts of ‘Diyyat’ for more than one limb is not envisaged because the word “ ’’ has been used in the definition which is plural of word “ ”. Muhammad Aslam v. The State 1993 SCR 199 (C)
- The question whether the sentence of ‘Tazeer’ includes the sentence of ‘Hakoomat-e-Adal’ left open in this case. Muhammad Aslam v. The State 1993 SCR 199 (E)
- The sentences of ‘Tazeer’ and ‘Hakoomat-e-Adal’ both are within the discretion of Court and the difference between ‘Hakoomat-e-Adal’ and ‘Diyyat’ is that while the minimum amount in case of ‘Diyyat’ has been fixed but there is no such fixed limit in case or ‘Hakoomat-e-Adal’ Tazeer”. Muhammad Aslam v. The State 1993 SCR 199 (D)
error: Content is protected !!