Pakistan Case LawLatest 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.
- LT.CoL. (Retd.) P. G. Braganza vs The Border Area Allotment Committee1984 CLC 1479 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-12Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This constitutional petition challenged the cancellation of land allotted to a retired Army officer under the Border Area Allotment Regulation (Martial Law Regulation No. 9 of 1959). The core legal questions concerned the maintainability of the petition filed by an attorney and whether the petitioner’s permanent migration to Australia violated the mandatory residence conditions of the allotment. The Court held that the petition was maintainable, emphasizing that procedural technicalities should not defeat the ends of justice where the principal ratifies the attorney's actions. On the merits, the Court upheld the cancellation, ruling that the Border Area Scheme required allottees to reside on the land to provide leadership and security. The petitioner’s admitted absence constituted a breach of these conditions. The Court further established that it would not issue a writ where the underlying breach of law is continuing, as doing so would be a futile exercise that could be immediately nullified by a fresh, valid order, and that petitioners seeking discretionary relief must approach the Court with clean hands.
Questions settled- Can a constitutional petition be maintained if filed by an attorney whose power of attorney did not explicitly mention the filing of writ petitions?
- Does the Border Area Allotment Regulation (Martial Law Regulation No. 9 of 1959) require an allottee to personally reside on the allotted land?
- Should the High Court issue a writ if the underlying breach of law is continuing and would inevitably lead to the same result upon re-adjudication?
- Can a petitioner who has violated the conditions of a statutory land allotment scheme successfully invoke the court's discretionary constitutional jurisdiction?
- Liaqat Ali vs Firdaus Begum1984 CLC 1139 · Lahore High Court · 1982-11-16Read full judgment →
- Liaqat Ali and others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2913 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-16Read full judgment →
- Lever Brothers Pakistan Ltd. vs Muhammad Sule Man and Othbrs1984 PLC 115 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-29Read full judgment →
- Lala vs Additional Commissioner, Sargodha Division, Sargodha and 171984 CLC 2400 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-22Read full judgment →
- Lal Khan Etc. vs Sajwar Etc.1984 CLC 922 · Lahore High Court · 1983-01-23Read full judgment →
- Lahore Municipal Corporation vs Mian Muhammad Rafi1984 CLC 3111 · Lahore High Court · 1974-03-25Read full judgment →
- Lahore Development Authority vs Sunbeam Corporation (Regd.)1984 PLD Lahore 430 · Lahore High Court · 1984-05-05Read full judgment →
- Labha Masih vs The State1984 MLD 1492 · Lahore High Court · 1984-05-25Read full judgment →
- Khyzar Hayat vs The ST Ate1984 MLD 1259 · Lahore High Court · 1984-11-16Read full judgment →
- Khushi Muhammad vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1306 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-24Read full judgment →
- Khushi Muhammad vs Rao Muhammad Hafeez1984 CLC 348 · Lahore High Court · 1983-05-17Read full judgment →
- Khushi Muhammad vs Niaz Ali and others1984 P Cr. L J 2223 · Lahore High Court · 1982-11-21Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This criminal miscellaneous petition was filed under section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking the quashment of proceedings under sections 406 and 420 of the Pakistan Penal Code arising from a complaint instituted by the respondent against the petitioners. The core legal question concerned whether the High Court should quash criminal proceedings initiated with mala fide intentions and based on unbelievable allegations, thereby preventing an abuse of the process of the court and unnecessary harassment of the accused. The Lahore High Court held that the complaint was patently false, motivated by strained family relations and prior litigation, and filed for ulterior motives by exploiting the respondent's official position as a police official. The court ruled that allowing such a prosecution to continue would result in an abuse of the process of the court. Consequently, the petition was accepted and the criminal proceedings along with the summoning order were quashed, reaffirming the principle that the High Court will intervene under section 561-A to secure the ends of justice and prevent the harassment of innocent persons through meritless prosecutions.
Questions settled- Can the High Court quash criminal proceedings under section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when a complaint is found to be false and filed for ulterior motives?
- Whether the availability of an alternative remedy under section 249-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 bars the High Court from entertaining a petition for quashment filed prior to the enactment of that provision?
- Does the continuation of a criminal trial that is bound to result in an acquittal constitute an abuse of the process of the court?
- Khushi Muhammad Etc. vs Ashraf and Others1984 P Cr. L J 2064 · Lahore High Court · 1984-05-15Read full judgment →
- Khushi Muhammad Dogar and another vs The State1984 MLD 1337 · Lahore High Court · 1984-04-04Read full judgment →
- Khushi Muhammad and Others vs Abdul Hamid and Others1984 CLC 1436 · Lahore High Court · 1983-04-10Read full judgment →
- Khushi Muhammad and Another vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1832 · Lahore High Court · 1984-04-02Read full judgment →
- Khushi Muhamm Ad vs Mst. Zainab Bibi1984 CLC 2141 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-04Read full judgment →
- Khuda Bakhsh vs Malik Mushtaq Ahmad and Another1984 CLC 1000 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-04Read full judgment →
- Khuda Bakhsh vs Laloo1984 CLC 1387 · Lahore High Court · 1982-05-21Read full judgment →
- Khuda Bakhsh and Others vs Liaquat Ali and Others1984 CLC 3134 · Lahore High Court · 1984-05-30Read full judgment →
- Khizar Hayat and 2 Others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 54 · Lahore High Court · 1982-10-17Read full judgment →
- Khara vs Abdul Karim and 2 others1984 MLD 195 · Lahore High Court · 1984-01-13Read full judgment →
- Khan Zaman and Others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 28 · Lahore High Court · 1983-08-15Read full judgment →
- Khan Muhammad vs The State1984 MLD 1278 · Lahore High Court · 1984-11-03Read full judgment →
- Khan Muhammad vs Muhammad Iqbal and 4 Othbrs1984 CLC 1443 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-05Read full judgment →
- Khan Muhammad Khan vs Multan Development Authority1984 CLC 1799 · Lahore High Court · 1983-03-20Read full judgment →
- Khan Muhammad and Others vs Committee for Formulation of Scheme of Abandoned Canal for Fish Cultureand Others1984 CLC 1634 · Lahore High Court · 1983-03-11Read full judgment →
- Khan Muhammad alias Mhuam Mad Khan and Another vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1496 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-26Read full judgment →
- Khan Masood Ahmad Khan and Others vs Settlement Commissioner1984 CLC 1179 · Lahore High Court · 1978-01-31Read full judgment →
- Khan M Uham Mad vs Barkat Ali and Another1984 CLC 582 · Lahore High Court · 1983-12-20Read full judgment →
- Khan Baig vs The State1984 PLD Lahore 434 · Lahore High Court · 1984-04-17Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and sentence of the appellant under sections 302 and 404 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, following a trial where he pleaded guilty without oral evidence being recorded. The core legal questions involved the legality of the trial proceedings, particularly the failure to properly conclude an inquiry into the appellant's unsoundness of mind under section 465 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, the absence of legal representation during crucial early stages, and the propriety of convicting on a plea of guilt without recording prosecution evidence in a capital case. The Lahore High Court held that the trial was conducted in a perfunctory and illegal manner, vitiating the proceedings due to non-compliance with mandatory provisions regarding mental incapacity and trial procedure. The Court laid down that when an accused appears to be of unsound mind, holding and properly concluding an inquiry under section 465 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 is mandatory, and failure to do so renders subsequent proceedings illegal and void. Consequently, the conviction was set aside and the case remanded for a fresh trial.
Questions settled- What is the legal effect of a trial court failing to conclude an inquiry into the unsoundness of mind of an accused under section 465 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Whether a conviction based solely on a plea of guilt in a capital case without recording prosecution evidence is sustainable in law?
- Is it mandatory to provide legal representation at State expense to an unrepresented accused facing a charge punishable with death?
- Khan Ahmad Yar Khan vs Ghulam Murtaza Shah and 3 others1984 MLD 1232 · Lahore High Court · 1984-10-14Read full judgment →
- Khaliq Dad and Others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1312 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-01Read full judgment →
- Khaliq Dad and Another vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1401 · Lahore High Court · 1982-11-14Read full judgment →
- Khalilur Rehman Bhutta vs Razia Naz and Another1984 CLC 890 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-11Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This writ petition challenged a Family Court decree in a suit for dissolution of marriage, where the petitioner's defense was struck off for failure to file a written statement. The core legal questions were whether a Family Court has the authority to strike off a defense for non-filing of a written statement and whether an ex parte decree precludes the defendant from cross-examining the plaintiff's witnesses. The Court held that while the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 does not apply in its entirety to Family Courts, the court possesses inherent authority to regulate its proceedings and may strike off a defense for contumacious default in filing a written statement. However, the Court further held that an ex parte order does not deprive a defendant of the right to participate in proceedings at any stage, specifically the right to cross-examine the plaintiff's witnesses. Consequently, the decree was set aside to allow the petitioner to cross-examine the respondent's witnesses, establishing that the right to cross-examination remains intact even during ex parte proceedings.
Questions settled- Can a Family Court strike off a defendant's right to file a written statement for persistent failure to do so?
- Does the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 apply in its entirety to proceedings before a Family Court?
- Does an ex parte order in a family suit deprive the defendant of the right to cross-examine the plaintiff's witnesses?
- Khalilur Rehm an and 2 Others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1094 · Lahore High Court · 1979-10-03Read full judgment →
- Khalil Ahmad and others vs Hakim Ali and others1984 MLD 479 · Lahore High Court · 1984-04-06Read full judgment →
- Khalid Masood, Subdivisional Officer, WAPDA vs The Assistant1984 P Cr. L J 1612 · Lahore High Court · 1984-01-17Read full judgment →
- Khalid Javed Gillan and Another vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 100 · Lahore High Court · 1983-02-21Read full judgment →
- Khuda BAKHSHComplainant vs Aftab Hussain and 3 Others1984 P Cr. L J 724 · Lahore High Court · 1981-11-16Read full judgment →
- Khalid alias Khalidi vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2452 · Lahore High Court · 1983-03-26Read full judgment →
- Khaira vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2558 · Lahore High Court · 1981-12-05Read full judgment →
- Khadim Hussain vs Punjab Province and Others1984 CLC 2205 · Lahore High Court · 1983-06-04Read full judgment →
- Khadim Hussain vs Ghulam Rabbani and Others1984 CLC 1137 · Lahore High Court · 1983-03-15Read full judgment →
- Khadim Hussain vs Climax Engineering Company Ltd.1984 MLD 928 · Lahore High Court · 1984-02-19Read full judgment →
- Kha Lid vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 3060 · Lahore High Court · 1974-01-31Read full judgment →
- Kh. Muhammad Shafi vs Muhammad Bashir and 10 others1984 MLD 261 · Lahore High Court · 1984-06-19Read full judgment →
- Kausar Bibi vs Sh. Abdur Rashid1984 CLC 1144 · Lahore High Court · 1983-02-20Read full judgment →
- Karim Bakhsh and Anothers vs Hussain1984 CLC 2154 · Lahore High Court · 1983-07-24Read full judgment →
- Karamat and Another vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1330 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-10Read full judgment →
- Karam Hussain vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 427 · Lahore High Court · 1982-08-01Read full judgment →
- Karam Din vs Ali Muhammad and Another1984 CLC 2981 · Lahore High Court · 1984-02-25Read full judgment →
- Karam Bakhsh alias Kama and Another vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1858 · Lahore High Court · 1983-07-05Read full judgment →
- Karam Ali and others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2523 · Lahore High Court · 1982-12-29Read full judgment →
- Kaniz Fatima vs Muhammad Nawazish and Others1984 CLC 2399 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-10Read full judgment →
- Kaniz Fatima vs Muhammad Na Wazish and (mins1984 CLC 356 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-10Read full judgment →
- Kamran Khan vs The State and Others1984 P Cr. L J 479 · Lahore High Court · 1983-02-14Read full judgment →
- K Han Muhammad/ vs Province of Punjab through Collector, Multan1984 CLC 2124 · Lahore High Court · 1982-10-30Read full judgment →
- Jumma and Anothers vs Settlement Commissioner, Multan and Others1984 CLC 1177 · Lahore High Court · 1974-12-06Read full judgment →
- Jumma and another vs The State1984 MLD 1450 · Lahore High Court · 1984-04-23Read full judgment →
- Juma Khan and Another vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1141 · Lahore High Court · 1980-07-06Read full judgment →
- Jewan vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2472 (2) · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-25Read full judgment →
- Javid Khan vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1912 · Lahore High Court · 1983-05-10Read full judgment →
- Javed Masih and another vs The State1984 MLD 1457 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-19Read full judgment →
- Javed Iqbal and 3 Others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 3247 · Lahore High Court · 1983-03-08Read full judgment →
- Javaid vs The State1984 PLD Lahore 34 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-14Read full judgment →
- Javaid Iqbal and others vs The State1984 MLD 1443(2) · Lahore High Court · 1984-11-12Read full judgment →
- Jan Muhammad and Others vs Additional Settlement Commissioner1984 CLC 1172 · Lahore High CourtRead full judgment →
- Jan Mohammad and others vs Muhammad Sarwar1984 CLC 2656 · Lahore High Court · 1980-04-08Read full judgment →
- Jamil Ahmad and 6 others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2297 · Lahore High Court · 1983-09-04Read full judgment →
- Jameel Ahmad Saleem and Others vs Government of Punjab and Others1984 PLD Lahore 391 · Lahore High CourtRead full judgment →
- Jalla and 5 others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2594 · Lahore High Court · 1983-05-02Read full judgment →
- Jalal Masih and others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2547 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-18Read full judgment →
- Jahangir and Another vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1015 · Lahore High Court · 1983-01-11Read full judgment →
- Jahangir Alt and 5 Others vs Fazalurrehman and 2 Others1984 CLC 3379 · Lahore High Court · 1984-06-11Read full judgment →
- Jaffar vs The State1984 MLD 1300 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-11Read full judgment →
- Jaffar and Another vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1027 · Lahore High Court · 1982-12-03Read full judgment →
- Jabbar vs The State1984 PLD Lahore 385 · Lahore High Court · 1984-02-05Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This judgment disposes of criminal appeals, a murder reference, and a revision petition arising from a trial before the Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura. The appellants were convicted under Sections 302, 324, and 323 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the murder of Faqir Hussain and causing injuries to eyewitnesses, while eight co-accused were acquitted. The core legal questions before the High Court were whether interested and inimical ocular evidence disbelieved as to the majority of accused could sustain the convictions of the appellants, and whether delayed recoveries from open and accessible places provided independent corroboration. The Lahore High Court held that the eyewitnesses were interested and inimical, the FIR was recorded at the spot, and the recovery witnesses were not disinterested. Moreover, recoveries of weapons made ten days after the incident from open places lacked probative value and failed to provide required independent corroboration. Consequently, the High Court set aside the convictions and sentences, acquitted the appellants, rejected the murder reference, and dismissed the revision for enhancement.
Questions settled- Can a conviction be sustained on the uncorroborated testimony of interested and inimical eyewitnesses who have been disbelieved regarding co-accused?
- Does a recovery of an alleged weapon of offence from an open and accessible place ten days after the occurrence constitute reliable corroborative evidence?
- Whether the failure to associate independent and disinterested local residents during recovery proceedings weakens the evidentiary value of such recoveries?
- J Ali Muhamma D vs Secretary, Housing and Physical1984 CLC 2203 · Lahore High Court · 1983-07-02Read full judgment →
- Mahmud vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2504 · Lahore High Court · 1983-07-08Read full judgment →
- Ittefaque Shaheen Wheat Thrashers vs Ittefaque Industries (Regd,)1984 CLC 2189 · Lahore High Court · 1983-06-12Read full judgment →
- Ismail alias Smail and 2 others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2184 · Lahore High Court · 1982-06-11Read full judgment →
- Islamic Republic of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Government of Pakistan, Is vs Messrs Babar & Company1984 CLC 1535 · Lahore High Court · 1984-05-05Read full judgment →
- Islam Hassan Khan vs Secretary, Industries Government of Punjab1984 PLD Lahore 338 · Lahore High Court · 1981-12-14Read full judgment →
- Ishaque Masih vs The State1984 MLD 1473 · Lahore High Court · 1984-01-17Read full judgment →
- Irshad Mahmood and Another vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1651 · Lahore High Court · 1983-01-17Read full judgment →
- Iqbal vs The State1984 MLD 1416 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-09Read full judgment →
- Iqbal Siddiqui vs Assistant Settlement Commissioner (Urban) and Others1984 PLD Lahore 291 · Lahore High Court · 1984-02-19Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This constitutional petition arose from proceedings initiated by the Settlement Department at the behest of a tenant seeking the cancellation of a property transfer originally made in favour of the petitioners' deceased predecessor. The core legal question was whether designated authorities under repealing legislation have the jurisdiction to reopen past and closed transactions, including allegations of fraud, after the repeal of the governing settlement laws. The Lahore High Court held that after the repeal of the relevant statute, authorities under the new dispensation lack jurisdiction to reopen or review past and closed transactions, such as a transfer order that remained in the field, rendering any such subsequent proceedings coram non judice, void ab initio, and without lawful authority. The key principle laid down is that settlement authorities cannot entertain mala fide applications by third parties to reopen past and closed transactions after the repeal of the settlement laws, and government officers abusing statutory powers for malicious purposes commit gross misconduct.
Questions settled- Do designated authorities under repealing laws have jurisdiction to reopen past and closed transactions after the repeal of the settlement laws?
- Can settlement authorities initiate inquiries into property transfers at the instance of a third-party tenant acting with mala fide intent?
- Whether proceedings initiated by settlement authorities after the repeal of the governing statute are void ab initio?
- Iqbal Begum vs Muhammad Khan and 2 others1984 MLD 466 · Lahore High Court · 1984-04-08Read full judgment →
- Iqbal alias Papu vs The State1984 MLD 1298 · Lahore High Court · 1984-06-27Read full judgment →
- Iqbal Ali Sheikh vs Haii Abdul Karim and 2 Others1984 CLC 352 · Lahore High Court · 1983-05-03Read full judgment →
- Intezar Ahmad Khan vs The State1984 MLD 1586 · Lahore High Court · 1983-07-04Read full judgment →
- Inayatullah vs Mian Ghulam Ahmad and 2 Others1984 CLC 1320 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-24Read full judgment →
- Inayatullah and Others vs Muhammad Abdullah and Others1984 CLC 473 · Lahore High Court · 1983-05-02Read full judgment →
- Inayat Masih vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1324 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-31Read full judgment →
- Inayat and Others vs Bhag ALl and Others1984 CLC 403 · Lahore High Court · 1983-06-07Read full judgment →
- Inam and Another vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1865 · Lahore High Court · 1983-06-14Read full judgment →
- Imdad Hussain vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2043 · Lahore High Court · 1984-02-10Read full judgment →
- Imam Bakhsh and Others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 3210 · Lahore High Court · 1975-06-01Read full judgment →