Latest Judgments

Newly reported judgments from the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the High Courts and tribunals, added as they are processed — free, full text, updated daily. Judgments marked NEW were added in the most recent update. 79,348 judgments in total from the Lahore High Court.

• Rizwan Mahmood vs Collector and others1991 CLC 1078 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-03Read full judgment →
• Riffat Ali Barq vs S.H.O., Police Station, Muzaffarabad and 4 others-1991 P Cr.L J 9 · Lahore High Court · 1990-06-27
  quashment of proceedingspublic obscenityabuse of processcriminal proceedingsF.I.R. quashmentSection 294 PPC
  Summary & questions settled

  This Intra-Court Appeal challenged the dismissal of a writ petition seeking the quashment of criminal proceedings initiated under Section 294 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The appellants, medical students, were charged with performing obscene acts in a public place. The core legal question was whether the allegations in the F.I.R., even if accepted as true, constituted the offence of obscenity under the statute. The Court held that for an offence under Section 294, P.P.C. to be established, the prosecution must prove the act was obscene, occurred in a public place, and caused annoyance to others. Finding that the F.I.R. failed to disclose these essential ingredients and that the prosecution was likely concocted, the Court ruled that continuing the trial would constitute an abuse of the process of the Court. Consequently, the Court set aside the impugned judgment and quashed the criminal proceedings, establishing the principle that courts must insist on concrete evidence for offences easily fabricated, such as public obscenity, to prevent unwarranted trials and protect individuals from the abuse of legal process.

  Questions settled

  • What are the essential ingredients required to establish an offence under Section 294 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
  • Can a High Court quash criminal proceedings if the F.I.R. fails to disclose the necessary elements of the alleged offence?
  • Is a trial court required to insist on solid evidence before proceeding with charges that are easily concocted and difficult to rebut?
  Read full judgment →
• Rifat Ali Barq vs S.H.O and OtherK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 489 · Lahore High Court · 1990-06-27Read full judgment →
• Riaz And Others vs The State1991PCr.LJ 877 · Lahore High Court · 1991-01-22Read full judgment →
• Riaz and others vs The State1991 MLD 2518 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-04Read full judgment →
• Riaz Ahmad vs The Inspector of Police/Station House Officer, Police1991 P C r. L J 6 · Lahore High Court · 1990-07-10Read full judgment →
• Riaz Ahmad vs Mst. Maqsood Bibi and another1991 CLC 1354 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-08Read full judgment →
• Riaz Ahmad And Others vs The State and others-1991 P Cr. L J 2079 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-13Read full judgment →
• Riaz Ahmad And Another vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1350 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-11Read full judgment →
• Riaz Ahmad And 8 Others vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 980 · Lahore High Court · 1990-02-25Read full judgment →
• Riaz Ahmad And 2 Others vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 890 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-24Read full judgment →
• Renala Estate Ltd. vs Government of Punjab through Secretary, Colonies Department and 4 others1991 CLC 2120 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-14Read full judgment →
• Rehmatullah Khan vs Saadat Ali Khan1991 MLD 1017 · Lahore High Court · 1991-01-13Read full judgment →
• Rehmat vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1009 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-10Read full judgment →
• Rehmat Ullah And Others vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1619 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-03Read full judgment →
• Rehmat Ali Khan vs Additional Inspector-General of Police1991 PLC (C.S.) 513 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-19Read full judgment →
• Rehmat Ali Etc. vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 104 · Lahore High Court · 1990-02-10Read full judgment →
• Rehman And 2 Others vs The State and another-1991 P Cr. L J 948 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-24Read full judgment →
• Rehm Din And Another vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1677 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-08Read full judgment →
• Razzaq vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 942 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-19Read full judgment →
• Raza Mohammad vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 483 · Lahore High Court · 1990-10-15Read full judgment →
• Raza Khan vs District Magistrate, SialkotK.L.R.1991 Criminal Cases 503 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-26Read full judgment →
• Rauf Ahmad vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 407 · Lahore High Court · 1990-07-07Read full judgment →
• Rauf Ahmad vs Secretary to the Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Religious Affairs and Minorities Affairs, Islamabad and 9 others1991 PLD Lahore 33 · Lahore High Court
  evacuee trust propertyPermanent Transfer DeedGuru to Chela devolutionvalidation of transfersinquisitory proceedingsSettlement Departmentconstitutional petitionEvacuee Trust Property Board
  Summary & questions settled

  This judgment disposes of 25 consolidated constitutional petitions challenging orders passed by the Chairman, Evacuee Trust Property Board, and the Secretary, Ministry of Religious Affairs, which declared Mandi Bawa Lal in Chiniot to be evacuee trust property under Sections 8 and 10 of the Evacuee Trust Properties (Management and Disposal) Act 1975, invalidating transfers made to the petitioners by the Settlement Department. The core legal questions pertained to whether property devolving from Guru to Chela automatically constitutes evacuee trust property, whether the Chairman acts as an adjudicatory tribunal, and whether the issuance of a Permanent Transfer Deed (PTD) prior to June 1968 is a mandatory prerequisite for validating urban transfers under Section 10 of the 1975 Act. The Lahore High Court allowed the petitions, set aside the impugned orders, and remanded the references for fresh determination. The Court held that property devolution from Guru to Chela alone does not establish its trust character, which must be determined on overall evidence of status at Partition. It further held that proceedings under Section 8 are adjudicatory and inquisitory, requiring authorities to collect relevant evidence, and that bona fide utilization and full payment of price before June 1968, rather than the ministerial issuance of a PTD, governs validation under Section 10.

  Questions settled

  • Does the devolution of property from Guru to Chela automatically raise a legal presumption that the property is evacuee trust property?
  • Are proceedings before the Chairman, Evacuee Trust Property Board under Section 8 of the Evacuee Trust Properties (Management and Disposal) Act 1975 adjudicatory and inquisitory in nature?
  • Is the issuance of a Permanent Transfer Deed prior to June 1968 a mandatory requirement for validating an urban property transfer under Section 10 of the Evacuee Trust Properties (Management and Disposal) Act 1975 if entitlement was determined and purchase price was paid earlier?
  Read full judgment →
• Rashida Begum and others vs Chiragh Din1991 CLC 1703 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-06Read full judgment →
• Rashid alias Taidi vs The State1991 MLD 1998 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-28Read full judgment →
• Rashid Ahmad vs The State and others-1991 P Cr. L J 946 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-13Read full judgment →
• Rashid Aemad vs Mumtaz Hussain and others1991 MLD 1608 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-24Read full judgment →
• Rashad Ashraf vs Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Lahore1991 CLC 1646 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-19Read full judgment →
• Rao Munawar Hayat And Another vs The State1991 PCr.LJ 1781 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-13Read full judgment →
• Rana Shaukat Mahmood- vs The State1991 MLD 2509 · Lahore High Court · 1991-06-12Read full judgment →
• Rana Muzaffar Ali Khan vs Khalid Mehmood and others1991 MLD 1742 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-13Read full judgment →
• Sabir Ali vs The State -1991 PCr.LJ 1914 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-18Read full judgment →
• Rana Muhammad Latif vs Mst. Akhtar Sultana1991 CLC 1433 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-15Read full judgment →
• Rana Muhammad Azhar vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1629 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-13Read full judgment →
• Rana Ghulam Rasool and anothers vs Settlement Department1991 CLC 2091 · Lahore High Court · 1991-07-29Read full judgment →
• Rana Aftab Ahmed Khan vs Muhammad Shafi and others1991 CLC 1224 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-12Read full judgment →
• Ramzan Etc vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 331 · Lahore High Court · 1990-10-17Read full judgment →
• Ramzan and anothers vs The State1991 MLD 1971 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-29Read full judgment →
• Ramzan and anothers vs The State and another1991 MLD 2190 · Lahore High Court · 1991-07-17Read full judgment →
• Ramzan And Another vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1916 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-12Read full judgment →
• Ramzan And 8 Others vs S.H.O. and 9 others-1991 P Cr. L J 2297 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-04Read full judgment →
• Ramzan and 5 others vs Member, Board of Revenue and others1991 CLC 2125 · Lahore High Court · 1991-08-21Read full judgment →
• Rajmal (Deceased) Represented by Muhammad Ishaq Etc. vs Hiray KhanK.L.R. 1991 Civil Cases 97 · Lahore High CourtRead full judgment →
• Rajada and others vs The State1991 MLD 1770 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-27Read full judgment →
• Raja Abdul Rauf vs Raja Hameed Ullah Khan1991 CLC 301 · Lahore High Court · 1990-09-24Read full judgment →
• Rai Batey Khan vs RajaK.L.R. 1991 Civil Cases 513 · Lahore High Court · 1990-10-02Read full judgment →
• Rai Batey Khan and anothers vs Raja1991 MLD 587 · Lahore High Court · 1990-10-02Read full judgment →
• Rafiq Ahmad and 2 others vs Farzand Ali and 3 others1991 PLC (C.S.) 521 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-19Read full judgment →
• Raees Khan vs The State1991 P C r. LJ 617 · Lahore High Court · 1990-11-21Read full judgment →
• Rab Nawaz And Others vs The State-1991PCr.LJ 826 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-24Read full judgment →
• Qudrat Ullah vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1037 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-10Read full judgment →
• Qudrat Ullah Alias Rudhi vs Siddiq Ahmad and 17 others-1991 P Cr. L J 1520 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-03Read full judgment →
• Qasim Ali Khan vs D.C. FaisalabadK.L.R. 1991 Civil Cases 120 · Lahore High Court · 1990-06-17Read full judgment →
• Qaim Khan vs The Province of West Pakistan through The Collector, Sahiwal1991 MLD 1147 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-09Read full judgment →
• Qadir and others vs Mst. Mehri through Legal Heirs1991 CLC 1472 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-12Read full judgment →
• Punjab Road Transport Corporation through Member, Finance vs Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal through Chairman and 2 others1991 PLC 486 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-11Read full judgment →
• Punjab Provincial Cooperative Bank Ltd. vs Secretary to Government1991 CLC 968 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-17Read full judgment →
• Punjab Julius Salik vs Returning Officer and others1991 MLD 589 · Lahore High Court · 1990-06-20
  election petitionreserved seatsre-checking of votesabatement of petitiondeath of respondentRepresentation of the People Actconsolidated statements
  Summary & questions settled

  This matter concerns two election petitions filed by candidates contesting National Assembly seats reserved for Christians, challenging the election results due to alleged incorrect compilation of votes by Provincial Election Commissioners. The core legal questions involved the maintainability of election petitions upon the death of a respondent and the Tribunal's authority to order re-checking of consolidated vote statements. The Court held that under Section 75 of the Representation of the People Act 1976, election petitions can be decided on merits despite the death of a respondent, even where multiple respondents exist. The Tribunal rejected the demand for a general recount, emphasizing that such relief is not a matter of right but requires prima facie proof of error. However, it upheld the re-checking of consolidated statements against certificates issued to polling agents. Ultimately, the Tribunal declared the petitioners as the successful candidates, having found them to be the top scorers, and declared the election of the respondents void. The judgment affirms that statutory provisions should be interpreted reasonably to ensure justice and that Tribunals possess inherent powers to rectify calculation errors.

  Questions settled

  • Does an election petition abate upon the death of one of several respondents?
  • Can an Election Tribunal decide an election petition on merits after the death of a respondent?
  • Does an Election Tribunal have the inherent power to order the re-checking of consolidated vote statements?
  • Is an Election Tribunal empowered to review its own previous orders?
  Read full judgment →
• Punjab Agricultural Development and Supplies Corporation1991 PLC 38 · Lahore High Court · 1990-01-15
  Constitutional jurisdictionTrade union registrationIndustrial Relations OrdinanceWrit petitionFactual controversyLabour law
  Summary & questions settled

  This constitutional petition was filed by the Punjab Agricultural Development and Supplies Corporation Employees' Welfare Union challenging an order passed by the Registrar, Trade Unions, Bahawalpur, which granted registration to the Shaheen Workers Union under the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969. The petitioner contended that the registration was unlawful, alleging that the proceedings for the formation of the new union were bogus, that the members of the new union were still members of the petitioner union, and that the individual responsible for forming the new union was disqualified due to pending litigation regarding previous union elections. The respondents argued that the new union was formed after valid resignations from the petitioner union and that the Registrar had conducted a proper inquiry before issuing the registration certificate. The Lahore High Court held that the issues raised by the petitioner, specifically regarding the validity of membership and the legitimacy of the union's formation proceedings, required the recording of evidence. Consequently, the Court ruled that such factual disputes could not be adjudicated within its constitutional jurisdiction and dismissed the petition, upholding the Registrar's order.

  Questions settled

  • Can a High Court resolve disputed questions of fact requiring evidence in the exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction?
  • Is the registration of a trade union by the Registrar, Trade Unions, subject to interference in constitutional jurisdiction when factual disputes regarding membership exist?
  • Does the resignation of members from an existing union and subsequent formation of a new union constitute valid grounds for registration under the Industrial Relations Ordinance, 1969?
  Read full judgment →
• Province of the Punjab through Secretary, Education and 3 others vs Nawab Begum1991 MLD 679 · Lahore High Court · 1991-01-13Read full judgment →
• Province of the Punjab through Secretary Education, CivilK.L.R. 1991 Civil Cases 264 · Lahore High Court · 1991-01-13Read full judgment →
• Province of Punjab vs Muhammad Arfan Ali1991 CLC 1544 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-24Read full judgment →
• Province of Punjab through Secretary, Livestock vs Faiz Muhammad and 6 others1991 CLC 1160 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-27Read full judgment →
• Province of Punjab through Secretary, Health Department, Punjab, Lahore vs Doctor Muhammad Afzal Shah Hashmi and another1991 MLD 806 · Lahore High Court · 1990-11-06Read full judgment →
• Province of Punjab through Collector/Deputy Commissioner, Sargodha1991 CLC 830 · Lahore High Court · 1990-02-13Read full judgment →
• Province of Punjab through Collector, Layyah and 3 others vs Syed1991 MLD 466 · Lahore High Court · 1990-11-05Read full judgment →
• Province of Punjab and others vs Zahoorul Hassan Far000i1991 CLC 1288 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-03
  civil revisionmemorandum of appealcertified copy of judgmentdispensation of copylimitationex parte decreedate of birth
  Summary & questions settled

  This revision petition arises out of a civil suit filed by a Deputy Superintendent of Police against the Province of Punjab and others seeking a declaration regarding his correct date of birth. The trial court decreed the suit ex parte. The petitioners' appeal before the Additional District Judge was dismissed on the ground that the memorandum of appeal was not accompanied by a certified copy of the impugned judgment, nor had any application for its dispensation been filed within the period of limitation. The Lahore High Court examined the provisions of Order XLI, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 and upheld the lower appellate court's decision, holding that an appeal filed without a certified copy of the judgment and without seeking its dispensation is not validly presented and is barred by time. The Court also held that an act of admitting an appeal to regular hearing does not amount to an implied dispensation of the copy of the judgment unless the omission was specifically brought to the court's notice prior to admission. The revision petition was accordingly dismissed with costs.

  Questions settled

  • Whether an appeal filed without a certified copy of the impugned judgment is validly presented under Order XLI Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908?
  • Does the appellate court have the power to dispense with the copy of the decree under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908?
  • Does the admission of an appeal to regular hearing amount to an implied dispensation of the certified copy of the judgment when the omission was not brought to the court's notice?
  • Is an appeal barred by time if the certified copy of the judgment is not filed within the period of limitation and no application for its dispensation is made?
  Read full judgment →
• President of United Bank Ltd. vs United Bank Employees' Federation and others1991 PLC 766 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-15Read full judgment →
• Pir Bakhsh vs Mst. Anwar Mai and 5 others1991 MLD 464 · Lahore High Court · 1990-11-04
  pre-emptionconsolidation of holdingsright of substitutionpossession by pre-emptionconcurrent findings of factproperty identity
  Summary & questions settled

  This second appeal arises from a suit for possession by pre-emption filed by the respondent against the appellant. The trial court decreed the suit, and the appellate court upheld this decision. The appellant challenged the decree on the grounds that consolidation proceedings initiated during the pendency of the suit altered the identity of the land, necessitating a fresh determination of the property subject to the pre-emption claim. The core legal question was whether a pre-emptor's right to possession extends to new land allotted during consolidation proceedings in lieu of the original land subject to the pre-emption suit. The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the pre-emptor is entitled to the new land allotted in consolidation proceedings. Relying on the principle that a landowner retains the same rights in new land as they held in the old land under consolidation laws, the Court affirmed that the right of pre-emption is a right of substitution, allowing the pre-emptor to follow the substituted property. The Court found no illegality or jurisdictional defect in the concurrent findings of the lower courts.

  Questions settled

  • Does a right of pre-emption extend to new land allotted during consolidation proceedings in lieu of the original land?
  • Can a pre-emptor claim the substituted land in a pre-emption suit if consolidation proceedings occur during the pendency of the suit?
  • Does a landowner retain the same rights in new land as held in old land under the Punjab Consolidation of Holdings Act 1936?
  Read full judgment →
• Pervaiz Iqbal Chughtai and 2 others vs Abdul Wahid Qureshi and others1991 CLC 1217 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-19Read full judgment →
• Pervaiz alias Peja vs The State1991 MLD 2428 · Lahore High Court · 1990-08-29Read full judgment →
• Pehlwan Khan And Another vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1510 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-21Read full judgment →
• Peer Muhammad Alias Peera vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 2322 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-13Read full judgment →
• Pasrur Sugar Mills Ltd., Pasrur through Resident Director vs The Punjab1991 PLC 328 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-06Read full judgment →
• Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Works, Islamabad vs Mrs. Khalid1991 CLC 563 · Lahore High Court · 1990-12-10
  execution of decreeagainst governmentprocedural lawequality before lawcivil revision
  Summary & questions settled

  This civil revision petition arose from execution proceedings of a decree for possession of a house obtained by Mrs. Khalid Nazir against the Ministry of Works, Government of Pakistan, after a lease expired. The core legal question was whether non-compliance with the procedural technicalities of Section 82 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908—specifically the requirement that a court report an unsatisfied decree against the government to the provincial government and wait three months before issuing execution—vitiates the execution proceedings where the judgment-debtor government had prior notice and time to satisfy the decree. The Lahore High Court dismissed the petition in limine, holding that Sections 79 to 82 of the Code are procedural provisions designed to give the government a final opportunity to satisfy a decree, rather than creating substantive rights. The Court laid down that procedural technicalities, especially in commercial or non-sovereign transactions like hiring a house, must be interpreted liberally in light of the constitutional principle of equality before the law under Article 25 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973, and cannot be used to frustrate the execution of a lawful decree indefinitely.

  Questions settled

  • Whether the provisions of Section 82 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 are mandatory or procedural in nature?
  • Can procedural technicalities under Section 82 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 be interpreted liberally in non-sovereign government transactions?
  • Does the principle of equality before law under Article 25 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 affect the application of procedural delays claimed by the government?
  Read full judgment →
• Province of Punjab Etc. vs Mian Saeed AhmadK.L.R. 1991 Civil Cases 296 · Lahore High Court · 1990-06-05Read full judgment →
• Pakistan Engineering Company Ltd. vs Mushtaq Ahmed Bhatti and another1991 PLC 559 · Lahore High Court · 1990-12-11Read full judgment →
• Packages Limited vs Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal and otherss1991 PLC 499 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-26Read full judgment →
• P vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 212 · Lahore High Court · 1990-05-08Read full judgment →
• P vs National Bank of PakistanK.L.R.1991 Labour & Service Cases178 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-28Read full judgment →
• P vs 'R'K.L.R. 1991 Civil Cases 654 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-27Read full judgment →
• Orji Ekearur Orji And Another vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1307 · Lahore High Court · 1990-05-16Read full judgment →
• Omar vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 354 · Lahore High Court · 1990-06-05Read full judgment →
• Obie Funs Emanuel vs The State1991 P Cr: L J 1705 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-25Read full judgment →
• Rana Muhammad Ramzan vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 2059 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-30Read full judgment →
• Nusrat vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1621 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-24Read full judgment →
• Noora and others vs Umar Hayat and 2 others1991 CLC 1638 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-17Read full judgment →
• Noor Samand vs Province of Punjab Etc.K.L.R. 1991 Civil Cases 244 · Lahore High Court · 1990-07-10Read full judgment →
• Noor Muhammad vs The State and 11 others1991 MLD 1780 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-22Read full judgment →
• Noor Muhammad vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 405 · Lahore High Court · 1990-09-18Read full judgment →
• Noor Muhammad vs Mulazim Hussain and 4 others1991 CLC 721 · Lahore High Court · 1990-11-20Read full judgment →
• Noor Muhammad Etc. vs Ahmad Din(K.L.R. 1991 Revenue Cases 113) · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-15Read full judgment →
• Noor Muhammad And Others vs The State1991PCr.LJ 143 · Lahore High CourtRead full judgment →
• Noor Muhammad and others vs Saifullah and others1991 CLC 795 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-20Read full judgment →
• Noor Muhammad and anothers vs The Member,Board of Revenue, West1991 MLD 1507 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-13Read full judgment →
• Noor Muhammad and 16 others vs Nazir Ahmed and 11 others1991 CLC 1727 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-26Read full judgment →
• Noor Elahi And Another vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1565 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-06Read full judgment →
• Noor Akbar and anothers vs The State and others1991 MLD 1623 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-06Read full judgment →
• Noor Ahmad vs The State1991 PCr.LJ 1015 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-24Read full judgment →