Due Process of Law

Procedural irregularities in civil matters are different than that in criminal matters — In civil matters if substantial justice is done, procedure may yield to justice, but in criminal cases the substantial justice cannot be said to have been done if due process of law is not observed — The due process of law is the golden rule, not the selective process — Internal administrative arrangement of an institution as to how the business has to be regulated or done or who is to conduct the business, relates to administrative skill of an administrator unless regulated by rules or statutes, but rights and liabilities creating powers have to be exercised in accordance with law, not over and above the law — Nobody is above the law including the law makers themselves. Hakam Deen v. State & 16 others 2005 SCR 314 (P)
Trend of deviating from legal procedure in the name of speedy disposal of cases is a dangerous tendency — There is marked difference between the Speedy Trial Courts, Special Courts, Summary Trial Courts and the Courts of normal criminal and civil jurisdiction — Courts of every category have to act strictly in accordance with the procedure which is prescribed by it — No Court can create or adopt a procedure which is not meant for it — It amounts to acting contrary to law — It is duty of a Court to make best use of even a bad law — Harshness of a law can be softened by its wise application and interpretation — Laws which have stood the test of responsibility for the last more than one century throughout the world cannot be allowed to be defeated in the name of speedy trial. Hakam Deen v. State & 16 others 2005 SCR 314 (Q)
The due process of law is golden rule, not the selective process — Internal administrative arrangement of an institution as to how business has to be regulated or done or who is to conduct business — Relates to administrative skill of an administrator — But the rights and liabilities creating powers have to be exercised in accordance with law not over and above law — Nobody is above law including the law makers themselves. Hakam Deen v. State and 15 others 2006 SCR 120 (P)
Trend of deviating from legal procedure in tendency — There is marked difference between the speedy trial Courts, Summary trial Courts and Courts of normal criminal and civil jurisdiction — Courts have to act strictly in accordance with the procedure which is prescribed for it — It is duty of a Court to make best use of even a bad law — Harshness of law can be softened by its wise application and interpretation — But laws which have stood the test of reasonability for the last more than one century throughout the world cannot be allowed to be defeated in the name of speedy trial, unless it is amended or repealed by competent Legislature — Courts cannot amend the law — Competent Courts can declare a law ultra vires the Constitution but as long as it is on the statute book, no reform or policy can override it — However, the Courts can change earlier interpretation or view in view of changed circumstances, but not the law. Hakam Deen v. State and 15 others 2006 SCR 120 (Q) 2001 SCR 362 rel.