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.

• Az1z alias Nazar Muhammad vs Mst.Zohra and others1984 MLD 1490 · Lahore High Court · 1984-04-08Read full judgment →
• Aurangzeb Shah vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 109 · Lahore High Court · 1981-03-25Read full judgment →
• Attar vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1180 · Lahore High Court · 1983-07-08Read full judgment →
• Atta Muhammad vs Assistant Commissioner and 2 Others1984 CLC 1316 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-09Read full judgment →
• Atta Muha M Ma D vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 927 · Lahore High Court · -Read full judgment →
• Ata Muhammad and 2 others vs Member, Revenue Board of Revenue, Punjab, Lahore and 3 others1984 MLD 450 · Lahore High Court · 1984-02-15Read full judgment →
• Aslam Pervaiz vs The State1984 PLD Lahore 204 · Lahore High Court · 1984-02-25
  Section 382-B CrPCfunctus officioreview of judgmentinherent powerspre-trial detentioncriminal appealsentencing discretion
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal miscellaneous application was filed by a convict seeking the benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, requesting that his pre-trial detention be counted towards his sentence, after the appellate court had already signed and pronounced the judgment. The core legal question was whether the High Court, having become functus officio upon signing the judgment, could entertain such an application or exercise inherent powers to grant the relief. The Court held that the application was incompetent. It ruled that Section 369 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 expressly bars the alteration or review of a judgment once signed, except for clerical errors. The Court emphasized that Section 382-B is not an automatic, mandatory provision but requires judicial discretion, and the plea must be raised during the trial or appeal. Furthermore, the Court held that inherent powers under Section 561-A cannot be invoked to bypass express statutory prohibitions or to reconsider the quantum of sentence. Consequently, the application was dismissed as it sought to reopen a closed matter.

  Questions settled

  • Can a High Court review or alter its own judgment in a criminal case after it has been signed and pronounced?
  • Does the benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 apply automatically, or does it require judicial discretion?
  • Can the inherent powers under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 be used to bypass the statutory bar against reviewing a judgment?
  • Is an application for the benefit of Section 382-B maintainable after the appellate judgment has become final?
  Read full judgment →
• Aslam Khan vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2166 (1) · Lahore High Court · 1983-08-21Read full judgment →
• Aslam and 2 Others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1861 · Lahore High Court · 1983-05-03Read full judgment →
• Asif Ma Hmood vs Muhammad Ismail and Others1984 P Cr. L J 838 · Lahore High Court · 1978-01-09Read full judgment →
• Asif Akhtar Malhi and Anothers vs Pakistan Bar Council and 2 Others1984 CLC 558 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-28Read full judgment →
• Ashiq Hussain vs The State1984 MLD 1545 · Lahore High Court · 1983-06-24Read full judgment →
• Ashiq Hussain and 2 Others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 930 · Lahore High Court · 1982-08-07Read full judgment →
• Ashfaq Shahid vs Waheed Ullah Goraya and Another1984 CLC 393 · Lahore High Court · 1983-09-24Read full judgment →
• Ashfaq Ahmad vs Mian Waheeduddin and Others1984 CLC 925 · Lahore High Court · 1983-05-03Read full judgment →
• Asghar and Fazla vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2469 · Lahore High Court · 1983-09-13Read full judgment →
• Asghar Ali vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2443 · Lahore High Court · 1983-02-22Read full judgment →
• Asghar Ali Asad vs Muhammad Ramzan and 3 Others1984 P Cr. L J 384 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-05Read full judgment →
• Asgh Ar Ali vs The State1984 MLD 314 · Lahore High Court · 1984-07-17Read full judgment →
• Arshad Javid vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2669 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-19Read full judgment →
• Arshad Hussain vs The State1984 MLD 1381 · Lahore High Court · 1984-07-08Read full judgment →
• Arshad Ahmad vs Naseer Ahmad1984 CLC 1682 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-25Read full judgment →
• Ars Had Mahmood vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1827 · Lahore High Court · 1984-04-06Read full judgment →
• Arif Mutin Bhutta vs The State1984 PLD Lahore 383 · Lahore High Court · 1984-05-20Read full judgment →
• Arif Iqbal Hussain Bhatti vs Sh. Riaz Ahmad and Others1984 CLC 1780 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-20Read full judgment →
• Arif Ali and others vs Deputy Commissioner, Faisalabad and others1984 MLD 381 · Lahore High Court · 1984-06-18Read full judgment →
• Arif Ali And Another vs The StatePTCL 1984 (CL) 398 · Lahore High Court · 1983-01-22Read full judgment →
• Anwarul Haq vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 448 · Lahore High Court · 1981-12-13Read full judgment →
• Anwari Khatoon vs Payment of Wages Authority and 3 Others1984 PLC 163 · Lahore High Court · 1982-11-22Read full judgment →
• Anwar Masih Convict vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 332 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-08Read full judgment →
• Anwar Javaid vs The State1984 MLD 1565 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-10Read full judgment →
• Amjad Mahmood vs The State and Others1984 P Cr. L J 837 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-10Read full judgment →
• Amir Bakhsh and Others vs Wahid Bakhsh and 6 Others1984 CLC 1557 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-25Read full judgment →
• Amir and ANOTHERConvict vs The State1984 PLD Lahore 326 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-19Read full judgment →
• Amir Ali vs The Additional District Judge, Jhang and 2 Others1984 CLC 3372 · Lahore High Court · 1984-05-29Read full judgment →
• Anisurrehman vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2066 · Lahore High Court · 1984-05-11Read full judgment →
• Amir Afzal vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2239 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-22Read full judgment →
• Amanullah Khan Sindhoo vs Shabir Hussain, S. H. 0. Police Station1984 P Cr. L J 3096 (1) · Lahore High Court · 1983-08-23Read full judgment →
• Amanullah and Others vs Muhammad Hafeez and Others1984 CLC 2126 · Lahore High Court · 1983-07-01Read full judgment →
• Amanulla H Khan vs Eidat Shah1984 P Cr. L J 1352 · Lahore High Court · 1980-10-27Read full judgment →
• Amanat Ali vs The State1984 MLD 1260 · Lahore High Court · 1984-11-06Read full judgment →
• Amanat Ali and 3 Others vs Haji Muhammad Al11984 CLC 362 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-22
  pre-emptionestoppelwaiversecond appealremandappellate court dutyfinding of fact
  Summary & questions settled

  This Regular Second Appeal arises from a pre-emption suit where the appellants (vendees) contested the respondent's (pre-emptor) claim, arguing estoppel based on the respondent's alleged participation in the sale bargain. The trial court and the first appellate court both ruled against the appellants on the issue of waiver/estoppel. The appellants challenged the appellate court's judgment, arguing that the court failed to discuss the evidence presented by their witnesses. The High Court observed that while the right of pre-emption can be waived by conduct, the appellate court had failed to properly evaluate the evidence regarding the respondent's alleged participation in the bargain. The Court held that a finding of fact cannot be sustained if it is reached without discussing the material evidence on record. Consequently, the High Court set aside the appellate judgment and remanded the case to the first appellate court with directions to decide the matter afresh after a thorough discussion of the evidence concerning the issue of waiver.

  Questions settled

  • Does the mere presence of a pre-emptor at the time of a sale bargain or their participation in the transaction automatically amount to a waiver of the right of pre-emption?
  • Can a finding of fact by an appellate court be sustained if the court fails to discuss the material evidence on the record?
  • Under what circumstances does a pre-emptor's conduct constitute a waiver of the right of pre-emption?
  Read full judgment →
• Am1r Ahmad vs Abdul Hamid1984 MLD 461 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-16Read full judgment →
• Am Ir vs Iftikhar Jillani and Others1984 CLC 3038 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-05Read full judgment →
• Altaf Ahmad Asmat vs Sarfraz Hussain and 2 Others1984 CLC 1308 · Lahore High Court · 1984-02-27
  constitutional petitionviva vocepublic service commissioncivil judge recruitmentdiscretionary jurisdictionwrit jurisdictionadministrative instructions
  Summary & questions settled

  This judgment disposes of two connected constitutional petitions challenging the validity of viva voce tests conducted by the Punjab Public Service Commission for the posts of Civil Judges. The petitioners, who failed to secure selection, contended that the interviews were invalid because they were conducted by the Chairman or a Senior Member sitting singly with an interview committee, rather than by the full Commission as allegedly required under the Punjab Public Service Commission Ordinance, 1978. The High Court dismissed the petitions, holding that Section 3(5) of the Ordinance expressly validates proceedings of the Commission despite any defect in its constitution. Furthermore, the Provincial Government's administrative instructions permitting a single member to conduct interviews for Grade 16 and 17 posts carried the binding force of statutory rules. Finally, the Court emphasized that constitutional writ jurisdiction is discretionary and must be exercised in aid of justice; since the interview committee included two High Court Judges and an Additional Law Secretary, no injustice was shown to have occurred.

  Questions settled

  • Whether the proceedings of the Punjab Public Service Commission are invalidated if interviews are conducted by a single member or the Chairman instead of the full Commission?
  • Can administrative instructions issued by the Provincial Government carry the binding force of statutory rules?
  • Should the High Court exercise its discretionary writ jurisdiction to set aside an irregular proceeding if no substantial injustice has been caused to the petitioner?
  Read full judgment →
• Allauddin Arshad vs Mst. Neelofar Tareen and 2 Others1984 CLC 3369 · Lahore High Court · 1984-06-05
  Family Court jurisdictiondower recoverysatisfaction of dowercivil disputeconstitutional petitionNikahnamajurisdiction of courts
  Summary & questions settled

  This constitutional petition challenged the judgments of the Family Court and the Additional District Judge, which decreed a suit for the recovery of dower. The core legal question was whether a Family Court retains jurisdiction under the Family Courts Act, 1964, to adjudicate a claim for dower when the dower amount had already been satisfied through the payment of gold ornaments, which were subsequently retained by the husband. The High Court held that once the dower debt was satisfied through the transfer of gold ornaments, the nature of the claim transformed from a dower recovery suit into a civil dispute regarding the recovery of specific property. Consequently, the Family Court lacked the exclusive jurisdiction to entertain the suit, as the matter fell outside the ambit of the Family Courts Act, 1964. The principle laid down is that where a dower debt has been fully satisfied, a subsequent dispute over the retention of the assets used for that satisfaction constitutes a civil matter triable by a civil court, not a family court.

  Questions settled

  • Does a Family Court have jurisdiction to entertain a suit for recovery of dower after the dower debt has already been satisfied?
  • Does a dispute regarding the retention of gold ornaments, previously given as dower, fall within the exclusive jurisdiction of a Family Court?
  • Can a claim for the recovery of dower be converted into a civil suit once the dower debt is found to have been paid?
  Read full judgment →
• Allah Yar vs The State1984 MLD 1255 · Lahore High Court · 1984-11-10Read full judgment →
• Allah Yar and 7 Others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 3071 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-12Read full judgment →
• Allah Wasaya vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 929 · Lahore High Court · 1982-08-06Read full judgment →
• Allah Wasaya vs Sardar Shah1984 PLD Lahore 59 · Lahore High Court · 1982-12-20
  rejection of plaintOrder VII Rule 11privity of contractstranger to contracttrustconstructive trustspecific performancecause of actiontemporary injunctioncivil revision
  Summary & questions settled

  This civil revision arose from an order of the District Judge, Bahawalpur, affirming the rejection of a plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. The petitioner had filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement embedded within a compromise application filed in a previous appellate proceeding, to which the petitioner was a beneficiary but not a direct party. The trial and appellate courts rejected the plaint on the ground that the petitioner lacked a cause of action due to being a stranger to the contract. The High Court considered whether a stranger to a contract could enforce a benefit reserved for him under an exception to the doctrine of privity of contract. The High Court held that while the general rule requires privity, an exception exists under Section 94 of the Trust Act 1882 where an obligation in the nature of a trust is created. The court determined that the petitioner's claim fell within this exception, thereby disclosing a valid cause of action. Consequently, the High Court allowed the revision, set aside the rejection of the plaint, and remanded the suit for trial on the merits.

  Questions settled

  • Can a court reject a plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 simultaneously while dismissing an application for temporary injunction?
  • Can a beneficiary who is a stranger to a contract enforce a contractual provision made for their benefit under the law of Pakistan?
  • Does an obligation created under a compromise agreement constitute an encumbrance in the nature of a trust under Section 94 of the Trust Act 1882?
  Read full judgment →
• Allah Rakha vs The State1984 PLD Lahore 395 · Lahore High Court · 1984-05-28Read full judgment →
• Allah Nawaz Malik vs Government of the Punjab through Collector1984 PLC (C. S.) 18 · Lahore High Court · 1983-07-08Read full judgment →
• Allah Ditta vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1071 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-10Read full judgment →
• Allah Ditta vs Rehmatullah and 4 Others1984 CLC 849 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-12Read full judgment →
• Allah Ditta vs Muhammad Nawaz and 5 others1984 P Cr. L J 2240 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-11Read full judgment →
• Allah Ditta vs Gul Muhammad and Another1984 CLC 672 · Lahore High Court · 1983-01-28Read full judgment →
• Allah Ditta vs A. C./Collector and Others1984 CLC 417 · Lahore High Court · 1983-01-10Read full judgment →
• Allah Ditta and Others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 433 · Lahore High Court · 1981-09-28Read full judgment →
• Allah Ditta and 5 others vs Khan Muhammad1984 CLC 2699 · Lahore High Court · 1982-02-19Read full judgment →
• Allah Ditta and 2 others vs The State1984 MLD 1585 · Lahore High Court · 1982-12-21Read full judgment →
• Allah Bakhsh vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1606 · Lahore High Court · 1984-04-02Read full judgment →
• Allah Bakhsh and others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2648 · Lahore High Court · 1982-10-24Read full judgment →
• Allah Bak HSH and others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2945 · Lahore High Court · 1984-02-28Read full judgment →
• Allah Bachaya vs The State1984 MLD 1388 · Lahore High Court · 1984-09-01Read full judgment →
• Allah Bac Haya vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 3250 · Lahore High Court · 1982-09-07Read full judgment →
• Ali Muhammad vs The State1984 MLD 1407 · Lahore High Court · 1982-11-13Read full judgment →
• Ali Hassan vs Qutab Din alias Qutba1984 CLC 2414 · Lahore High Court · 1983-12-06Read full judgment →
• Ali Haider Shah vs Manzoor Mehdi and Others1984 CLC 946 · Lahore High Court · 1983-04-12Read full judgment →
• Ali Aquat Ali vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2549 · Lahore High Court · 1983-07-08Read full judgment →
• Ali Ahmad and Another vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1332 · Lahore High Court · 1984-01-29Read full judgment →
• Alamdar Hussain vs The ST Ate1984 MLD 1385 · Lahore High Court · 1982-11-15Read full judgment →
• Akhtar Ali vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1195 · Lahore High Court · 1983-05-06Read full judgment →
• Akbar and another vs The State1984 MLD 1571 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-11Read full judgment →
• Akbar Ali vs The State1984 MLD 1288 · Lahore High Court · 1984-10-26Read full judgment →
• Akbar Ali vs Muhammad Ibrahim Sardar and Another1984 CLC 1464 · Lahore High Court · 1984-04-06Read full judgment →
• Akbar Ali and others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2568 · Lahore High Court · 1982-05-30Read full judgment →
• Ahmad vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 772 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-28
  criminal revisioncognizance of offencemandatory provisionsillegal gratificationjurisdictionplea of guiltyfalse complaint
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal revision petition challenges a conviction under Section 182 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, arising from a complaint filed by a Station House Officer (S.H.O.) against the petitioner for allegedly filing a false application to the Deputy Inspector-General of Police. The core legal question was whether the complaint filed by the S.H.O. was competent under the mandatory provisions of Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, given that the initial application was addressed to the D.I.G. The Court held that Section 195(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 requires that for offences under Sections 172 to 188 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, cognizance can only be taken upon a complaint in writing by the public servant concerned or their superior. Since the S.H.O. lacked this authority, the complaint was incompetent, rendering the entire proceedings void for want of jurisdiction. The Court further noted that the appellate court had imposed an illegal sentence exceeding the statutory maximum fine. The conviction and sentence were quashed.

  Questions settled

  • Does a plea of guilty restrict the High Court's revisional jurisdiction to examine the legality of a conviction?
  • Can a court take cognizance of an offence under Section 182 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 upon a complaint filed by an officer other than the one to whom the false application was addressed?
  • Are the provisions of Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 regarding the filing of complaints mandatory?
  • What is the legal consequence when a mandatory condition for the exercise of jurisdiction by a court is not fulfilled?
  Read full judgment →
• Ahmad Khan vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2023 · Lahore High Court · 1984-04-28Read full judgment →
• Ahmad Hassan and 2 others vs Inayat Ullah and another1984 MLD 484 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-10Read full judgment →
• Ahmad Din vs Karam Elahi1984 CLC 2165 · Lahore High Court · 1983-11-18Read full judgment →
• Ahmad Bakhsh and another vs The State1984 MLD 1316 · Lahore High Court · 1984-02-18Read full judgment →
• Ahmad Ali and anothers vs Muhammad Ashraf and others1984 CLC 2667 · Lahore High Court · 1978-03-18Read full judgment →
• Agricultural Development Bank vs Sh. Muhammad Ayub1984 CLC 1696 · Lahore High Court · 1980-05-31Read full judgment →
• Adil Zaka Khan and 3 Others vs The State and 4 Others1984 PLD Lahore 376 · Lahore High Court · 1984-04-28Read full judgment →
• Addul Haq vs Mu Hammad Habib and Others1984 P Cr. L J 3102 · Lahore High Court · 1984-07-11Read full judgment →
• Abu Bakar and Others vs Province of Punjab and Others1984 CLC 1699 · Lahore High Court · 1983-12-10Read full judgment →
• Abid Shah and Others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 937 · Lahore High Court · 1982-11-27Read full judgment →
• Abid Hussain Bokhari and Others vs Director of Technical Education1984 CLC 1222 · Lahore High Court · 1984-02-27Read full judgment →
• Abid alias Bhola vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 2553 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-31Read full judgment →
• Abdus Sattar vs Muhammad Jame El and Another1984 CLC 2296 · Lahore High Court · 1984-02-04Read full judgment →
• Abdur REHMAN/Petitioner vs Board of Intermediate and Secondary1984 MLD 911 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-01Read full judgment →
• Abdur Rehman vs The State1984 PLD Lahore 122 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-07Read full judgment →
• Abdur Rehman vs Raabia Bibi and 7 Others1984 PLD Lahore 407 · Lahore High Court · 1984-03-19Read full judgment →
• Abdur Rehman Khan and others vs Collector Land Acquisition and others1984 CLC 2660 · Lahore High CourtRead full judgment →
• Abdur Rashid vs Sarfraz Arshad Khan and 2 others1984 MLD 244 · Lahore High Court · 1984-01-21Read full judgment →
• Abdur Rashid and Others vs Muhammad Shafi and Others1984 CLC 1377 · Lahore High Court · 1981-03-31Read full judgment →
• Abdur RAllAK and another vs Abdul Ghafoor1984 MLD 1135 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-10Read full judgment →
• Abdur Rahim vs Abdul Khaliq Qureshi and 2 Others1984 CLC 365 · Lahore High Court · 1983-10-09Read full judgment →
• Abdullah vs Settlement Com Missioner/Ad Ministrator (RP), Multan1984 CLC 1383 · Lahore High Court · 1983-03-19Read full judgment →
• Abdullah and 2 Others vs The State1984 P Cr. L J 1243 · Lahore High CourtRead full judgment →