The Supreme Court of Pakistan has upheld the conviction of two former army officials who were involved in the toppling of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s government in 1995. The court’s decision was based on the interpretation of the Pakistan Army Act, which allows for punishment on alternative charges and offenses.
The convicted individuals, Colonel (retd) Muhammad Azad Minhas and Colonel (retd) Inayatullah, had previously challenged their convictions in 2015 and 2000 at the Lahore High Court and Supreme Court, respectively, but their appeals were rejected. The Supreme Court, after considering both appeals from 2020 to 2022, had reserved its verdict.
The court’s judgment stated that both the appellant and petitioner were charged not only with the main offense but also with alternative charges and offenses, as indicated in the charge sheet. It further explained that the appellant and petitioner had filed petitions in 1996 challenging their arrest, detention, and trial by the Field General Court Martial. However, their petitions were dismissed, and their trials proceeded, resulting in their dismissal from service and rigorous imprisonment.
The court clarified that sentences awarded by a court-martial or another forum under the Pakistan Army Act are subject to judicial review only on grounds of mala fides, including malice in law, without jurisdiction, or coram non judice. In the absence of mala fide on the part of the prosecution, the court held that the convictions and sentences of the appellant and petitioner by the Field General Court Martial could not be deemed coram nonjudicial.
The court concluded that after dismissal from service, the appellant and petitioner could not claim any benefits, as their termination resulted from defiance of discipline and institutional orders. Therefore, their claims of double jeopardy had no legal foundation. As a result, the appeal and constitutional petition were dismissed for lacking merit.