“From a juristic point of view, the decisive criterion of a revolution is that the order in force is overthrown and replaced by a new order in a way which the former had not itself anticipated.”
–Hans Kelsen-Austrian Legal Philosopher
In the 1950s, Pakistani jury had to define two of the most decisive cases in its history; one was the legality of the abolishment of the constituent assembly by the then Governor General Ghulam Muhammad, and the other was a murder case known as ‘State versus Dosso.’ The former one is mostly known as ‘Federation of Pakistan v Maulvi Tamizuddin Khan,’ ruled by Justice Muhammad Munir invoked the ‘Doctrine of Necessity’ to label the action of Governor-General as a legal one.
The latter one was related to the murder of a person in Balochistan where Frontier Crimes Regulation was functional. The murderer Dosso was trialed by the Loya Jirga and found him guilty. The relatives of Dosso challenged the decision of Jirga in Lahore High Court (LHC). The court found the verdict of Jirga as unconstitutional and later regarded FCR as an unconstitutional because it was against the constitutional provision that everyone is equal before the law. LHC’s verdict was challenged by the federation, and the Supreme Court decided the fate on 11 October 1958 after the abrogation of the 1956 Constitution. The court found Dosso guilty under FCR and the act of 1958.