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.

• Muhammad Farooq And Another vs The State1991 PCr.LJ 1319 · Lahore High Court · 1991-01-26Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ejaz vs Secretary to Government of Punjab, Home1991 PLC (C.S.) 244 · Lahore High Court · 1990-08-13Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Din Etc vs Malik Noor Muhammad EtcK.L.R. 1991 Civil Cases 496 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-27Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Din and 11 others vs Malik Noor Muhammad and 16 others1991 MLD 1291 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-27Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Din and 11 others vs Ahmed Ali and 3 others1991 MLD 1425 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-27Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Chiragh and anothers vs Muhammad Fazil and 4 others1991 MLD 172 · Lahore High Court · 1990-10-06Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Boota vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1990 · Lahore High Court · 1991-07-01Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Boota And Another vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1048 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-18Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Binyamin and Seven Other vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 581 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-27Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Binyamin And Others vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1217 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-27
  dacoityretaining stolen propertyidentification paraderecovery of stolen propertybenefit of doubtcriminal appealacquittal
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal, along with a connected state appeal and complainant revision, arises from a judgment of the Special Court for Speedy Trials, Faisalabad, which convicted eight appellants under section 411, Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for retaining stolen property while acquitting them of dacoity under section 395/397, Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The prosecution alleged that the appellants committed robbery in the complainant's house and were arrested months later with stolen ornaments and firearms. The Lahore High Court examined the evidence and held that the acquittal for dacoity was justified due to the absence of an identification parade, as the accused were not previously known to the witnesses and not named in the first information report. Furthermore, the court held that the alleged simultaneous recovery of stolen property from all eight appellants at a bus stand after three and a half months defied natural probabilities and raised multiple hypotheses of police fabrication and planted evidence. Consequently, the court set aside the convictions under section 411, Pakistan Penal Code 1860, acquitted the appellants, and dismissed the state appeal and complainant revision.

  Questions settled

  • Whether the absence of an identification parade is sufficient to create a reasonable doubt as to the identity of accused persons not previously known to the witnesses?
  • Does the retention of stolen property for several months by multiple accused persons at a public place run counter to natural probabilities?
  • Can a conviction under section 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 be sustained when the evidence regarding the recovery of stolen property is doubtful and prone to alternative hypotheses of fabrication?
  • Whether a single circumstance creating reasonable doubt in the mind of a prudent person is sufficient for the acquittal of an accused?
  Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Bilal vs The Principal, National College of Textile1991 MLD 1605 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-18
  locus poenitentiaevested rightsretrospective effectadmission cancellationexecutive ordersconstitutional petition
  Summary & questions settled

  This constitutional petition challenged the cancellation of the petitioner's admission to the National College of Textile Engineering, Faisalabad. The petitioner had been admitted via a government quota, paid his dues, and received a roll number. Subsequently, the college cancelled his admission, citing a change in government policy regarding the Minister's quota and the fact that classes had not yet commenced. The core legal question was whether the college retained the authority to rescind an admission once the student had fulfilled all requirements and been issued a roll number, invoking the doctrine of locus poenitentiae. The Court held that the college had lost the right to repent because decisive steps had been taken—specifically, the acceptance of the admission, payment of dues, and issuance of a roll number. The Court ruled that executive orders cannot be applied retrospectively to divest vested rights. Furthermore, it found the cancellation unjust, as it would deprive the petitioner of educational opportunities at a late stage in the academic year. Consequently, the cancellation order was declared illegal and without jurisdiction.

  Questions settled

  • Does an educational institution retain the right to rescind an admission once the student has paid dues and received a roll number?
  • Can executive orders be given retrospective effect to cancel vested rights?
  • Does the doctrine of locus poenitentiae apply to an admission process where decisive steps have already been taken?
  Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Bashir vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1784 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-13Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Bashir vs Ramzan and others-1991 P Cr. L J 1695 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-16Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Bashir vs M.B.R. Etc(K.L.R. 1991 Revenue Cases 80) · Lahore High Court · 1990-11-24Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Bashir vs Ghulam Sarwar and 3 others1991 MLD 2072 · Lahore High Court · 1991-06-16Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Bashir Malik vs Imtiaz Khali() Malik and 2 others1991 MLD 1644 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-12Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Bashir And Another vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 373 · Lahore High Court · 1988-06-14Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Bashir alias Feri vs The State1991 MLD 1399 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-12Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Bashir Ahmad vs Saeed Ahmad and 8 others1991 CLC 1353 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-08Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Banaras vs Chairman, Union Council and 2 others1991 MLD 112 · Lahore High Court · 1990-06-02Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Bakhsh vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 367 · Lahore High Court · 1990-05-27Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Bakhsh vs The State1991 MLD 2502 · Lahore High Court · 1991-06-25Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Bakhsh And Another vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1982 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-13Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Azam vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 992 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-13Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Azam and 3 others vs The State1991 PLD Lahore 313 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-05Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ayyub vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1102 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-10Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ayub vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 2425 · Lahore High Court · 1991-09-17Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ayub vs Pakistan through Secretary Communications, Islamabad and others1991 PLC 169 · Lahore High Court · 1990-10-13Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 2239 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-03Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 139 · Lahore High Court · 1990-11-24Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 2064 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-25Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam vs Mst. Naseem1991 CLC 962 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-02Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam vs Fazal Din And Others1991 PCr.LJ 1611 · Lahore High Court · 1990-03-05Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam vs Ch. Mahmood Ahmad1991 MLD 56 · Lahore High Court · 1990-09-24Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam vs CH Mehmood Ahmad.K.L.R.1991 Civil Cases 344 · Lahore High Court · 1990-09-24Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam vs Addl District Judge EtcK.L.R.1991 Civil Cases 238 · Lahore High Court · 1990-11-13Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam through his Legal Heirs vs Syed Abid Saeed Kirmani1991 MLD 1705 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-20Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam Khan vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1347 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-24Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam Etc vs Khuda Bakhsh EtcK.L.R 1991 Civil Cases 389 · Lahore High Court · 1959-03-26Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam and others vs Ch. Muhammad Idrees through his Legal1991 CLC 780 · Lahore High CourtRead full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam And Another vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 945 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-19Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam and 3 others vs Zaffar Ullah1991 MLD 1966 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-25Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam And 2 Others vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 783 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-25Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Aslam Alias Chan vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 335 · Lahore High Court · 1990-07-28Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Asif vs Arif Hussain1991 MLD 51 · Lahore High Court · 1990-10-06Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Asif and anothers vs The State1991 MLD 1026 · Lahore High Court · 1991-01-22Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashraf vs Younus Butt, S.H.O., Satgarh, District Okara and 5 others1991 P Cr. L J 1641 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-08Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashraf vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1573 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-08Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashraf vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 132 · Lahore High Court · 1990-09-24Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashraf vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1875 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-15Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashraf vs National Bank of Pakistan and others1991 CLC 1018 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-06Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashraf vs Chief Settlement Commissioner and others1991 CLC 1413 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-11Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Azam And Others vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 987 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-02Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashraf Khan and others vs A. C. II, Sialkot and others1991 PLD Lahore 459 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-23Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashraf And Others vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1703 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-26Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashraf And Another vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1894 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-19Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashraf And 5 Others vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1680 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-30Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashraf Alias Achhu vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1030 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-17Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashraf Alias Achho vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 274 · Lahore High Court · 1990-07-24Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashiq vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 564 · Lahore High Court · 1990-12-05Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashiq alias Babu vs The State1991 MLD 2437 · Lahore High Court · 1991-07-20Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashfaque Alias Shafaat Ali Etc. vs The StateK.L.R. 1991, Criminal Cases 411 · Lahore High Court · 1990-05-06Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashfaque Alias Shafaat Ali And Another vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 2205 · Lahore High Court · 1990-05-06Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashfaq vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1623 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-06Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ashfaq vs The State1991 MLD 1534 · Lahore High Court · 1990-01-16Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Asghar vs The State1991PCr.LJ 1026 · Lahore High Court · -Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Asghar vs Muhammad Bashir EtcK.L.R. 1991 Civil Cases 237 · Lahore High Court · 1990-03-10Read full judgment →
• Muhammad As14raf And 5 Others vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1698 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-20Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Arshad vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 1028 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-16Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Arshad vs The State-1991 P Cr. L J 1884 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-22Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Arshad vs Secretary, Communications and Works1991 PLC (C.S.) 237 · Lahore High Court · 1990-10-30Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Arshad Kalim vs Chairman, Town Committee and others1991 PLC (C.S.) 80 · Lahore High Court · 1990-03-07Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Arif And Another vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 623 · Lahore High Court · 1990-11-17Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Anwar vs The State-1991PCr.LJ 162 · Lahore High Court · 1990-06-16Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Anwar vs District Magistrate, Sahiwal And Others1991 P Cr. L J 806 · Lahore High Court · 1990-06-16
  constitutional petitionre-post-mortem examinationdisintermentcause of deathpolice custodymagistrate powers
  Summary & questions settled

  This constitutional petition was filed before the Lahore High Court to challenge an order dated 22-5-1990 passed by the District Magistrate, Sahiwal, whereby an application for the re-post-mortem examination of the petitioner's deceased brother was accepted. The core legal question was whether a Magistrate is legally bound under section 176 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 to afford an opportunity of being heard to the complainant or record evidence before ordering the disinterment and re-examination of a dead body when the deceased was not in police custody. The Court held that section 176, Cr.P.C. applies specifically to deaths occurring in police custody, and in other cases, a Magistrate may direct the examination of an interred body to discover the cause of death without being obliged to hear the complainant or record evidence prior to making such an order. Consequently, the petition was dismissed.

  Questions settled

  • Whether a District Magistrate is obliged to afford an opportunity of being heard to the complainant before ordering the examination of an interred dead body?
  • Does section 176 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 apply to cases where a person dies outside the custody of the police?
  • Can a Magistrate order the disinterment and examination of a dead body to discover the cause of death without recording evidence beforehand?
  Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Anwar Khan vs Member, Board of Revenue (Colonies)1991 MLD 810 · Lahore High Court · 1990-11-24Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Anwar Khan vs Member Board of RevenueK.L.R. 1991 Revenue Cases 61 · Lahore High Court · 1990-11-24Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Anwar Bajwa vs The State1991 MLD 2529 · Lahore High Court · 1991-07-03Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Anwar and 4 others vs The State1991 MLD 1769 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-11Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Amir vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 2089 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-20Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Amir vs The State1991 MLD 2444 · Lahore High Court · 1991-07-20Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Amir vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 197 · Lahore High Court · 1990-06-11Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Amin vs Muhammad Yasin1991 CLC 1298 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-26
  stay of suitres judicataadministration suitmesne profitsCode of Civil Procedurecivil revisiontitle dispute
  Summary & questions settled

  This civil revision petition arose from a trial court order refusing to stay a subsequent suit for possession, damages, and mesne profits under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. The petitioner argued that the property in dispute was already the subject matter of a previously instituted administration suit, which was currently pending in appeal. The core legal question was whether the subsequent suit should be stayed under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 when the matter in issue—the ownership of the property—was substantially the same as in the prior suit, despite the presence of additional parties (sisters) in the earlier litigation. The Lahore High Court held that the subsequent suit must be stayed. The Court reasoned that because the claims for mesne profits and damages were contingent upon the determination of title, and because any finding on title in the prior suit would operate as res judicata between the parties, the requirements for a stay under Section 10 were fully satisfied. The presence of additional parties in the prior suit did not preclude the application of the stay provision.

  Questions settled

  • Does the presence of additional parties in a previously instituted suit prevent the application of Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 regarding the stay of a subsequent suit?
  • Can a suit for mesne profits and damages proceed when the underlying question of title is pending in a previously instituted suit?
  • What is the test for determining whether a subsequent suit should be stayed under Section 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908?
  Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Amin vs Mst. Khurshid Bibi1991 MLD 969 · Lahore High Court · 1990-11-21Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Amin Khan vs General Public and others1991 CLC 394 · Lahore High Court · 1990-11-14
  lunacy proceedingsinquisitorial jurisdictionunsound mindwelfare of lunaticinquisitionmedical examination
  Summary & questions settled

  This appeal challenges an order of the Additional District Judge dismissing a petition for inquisition filed under the Lunacy Act, 1912, which sought a declaration that the respondent was of unsound mind. The core legal question was whether proceedings under the Lunacy Act are adversarial or inquisitorial in nature, and whether the court is obligated to actively investigate the mental state of the alleged lunatic. The Court held that proceedings under the Lunacy Act are inquisitorial, not adversarial. The court acts in loco parentis, with a duty to protect the welfare of the alleged lunatic rather than merely adjudicating a dispute between parties. Consequently, the trial court erred by dismissing the petition solely for lack of evidence without exercising its duty to examine the alleged lunatic or order a medical examination. The principle laid down is that in lunacy matters, the court must actively inquire into the mental condition of the subject, utilizing its own observations and medical evidence to ensure the welfare of the individual, rather than relying strictly on the burden of proof between parties.

  Questions settled

  • Are proceedings under the Lunacy Act, 1912, adversarial or inquisitorial in nature?
  • Is a court empowered to order a medical examination of an alleged lunatic in proceedings under the Lunacy Act, 1912?
  • Does the court have a duty to personally examine an alleged lunatic during inquisition proceedings?
  • Can a court dismiss a petition under the Lunacy Act, 1912, solely on the ground of insufficient evidence produced by the parties?
  Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ameen And 3 Others vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 186 · Lahore High Court · 1991-06-25Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Altaf vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 289 · Lahore High Court · 1990-07-23Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Altaf Khan vs Mirza Rafaqat Ahmed an others1991 CLC 1410 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-16Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Alt Bhatti vs State Life Insurance Corporation.K.L.R. 1991 Civil Cases 258 · Lahore High Court · 1990-09-12Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ali vs The State1991 PCr.LJ 1618 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-10Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ali vs The State1991 MLD 1327 · Lahore High Court · 1984-05-13Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ali vs The StateK.L.R. 1991 Criminal Cases 587 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-12Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ali vs Rehmat Ali1991 CLC 1313 · Lahore High Court · 1991-04-15Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ali vs Muhammad Siddique and others1991 CLC 1546 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-19Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ali vs Election TribunalK.L.R. 1991 Civil Cases 31 · Lahore High Court · 1990-05-17Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ali vs Divisional Superintendent Pakistan Railways1991 PLC 482 · Lahore High Court · 1991-02-23Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ali Patwari vs Consolidation Officer And Others1991 P Cr. L J 283 · Lahore High Court · 1990-05-12Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ali Bhatti vs State Life Insurance Corporation of Pakistan1991 MLD 223 · Lahore High Court · 1990-09-12Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Ali And Another vs The State1991 PCr.LJ 1160 · Lahore High Court · 1991-03-26Read full judgment →
• Muhammad Alam vs The State1991 P Cr. L J 2072 · Lahore High Court · 1991-05-13Read full judgment →