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. 232,594 judgments in total.

• Wasim Iqbal vs Messrs Karwan-E-Islami International through Proprietor_Chief Executive_Owner_Partner and 3 others2023 CLC 630 · Sindh High Court · 2022-09-14Read full judgment →
• Wasim Abbas and another vs Higher Education Commission Akhtar2023 IHC 292 · Islamabad High Court · 2023-07-10Read full judgment →
• Waseem Khurshid vs Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training and others2023 PLC (C.S.) 158 · Islamabad High Court · 2021-07-16
  service rulespromotion criteriavested rightpost-qualification experienceconstitutional jurisdictioneligibility criteriacivil servant
  Summary & questions settled

  This matter involves a constitutional petition filed by a Deputy Secretary (Finance) (BPS-18) challenging the promotion criteria for the post of Director (Finance) (BPS-19) as prescribed by a 2015 notification issued by the Federal Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education (F.B.I.S.E.). The core legal question is whether the High Court, under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan, can strike down statutory eligibility criteria for promotion requiring specific post-qualification experience merely because existing feeding cadre officers do not fulfill it. The Islamabad High Court dismissed the petition, holding that rule-making authorities possess the exclusive domain to determine and enhance qualifications and service criteria to maintain efficiency, and civil servants possess no vested right to have eligibility rules remain unaltered or to be promoted. The key principle laid down is that the prescription of service rules and promotion criteria, including post-qualification experience requirements, is a matter of policy and administrative expediency into which courts will not interfere in the absence of a violation of a vested right.

  Questions settled

  • Can a court under constitutional jurisdiction declare promotion criteria unlawful merely because officers in the feeding cadre do not meet the prescribed requirements?
  • Does a civil servant have a vested right to have the eligibility criteria and service rules for a higher post remain constant and unaltered?
  • Is the rule-making authority competent to prescribe post-qualification experience requirements for promotion to a public post?
  Read full judgment →
• Waseem Akram vs Mst. Asma2023 MLD 989 · Sindh High Court · 2021-09-06Read full judgment →
• WASA Rawalpindi and another vs WASA Rawalpindi and another2023 LHC 6121, 2025 PLJ Lahore 36 · Lahore High Court · 2023-11-28
  regularization of serviceimplementation petitionexecuting court jurisdictionservice ruleseligibility criterialabour lawgrievance petition
  Summary & questions settled

  This petition challenged the orders of the Punjab Labour Court and the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal, which had directed the Water and Sanitation Agency (WASA), Rawalpindi, to regularize the services of private respondents against specific posts. The core legal question was whether an executing court, in implementation proceedings, can grant relief beyond the scope of the original judgment or the pleadings, and whether employees hired without due process can claim regularization against specific posts despite failing to meet subsequent service eligibility criteria. The Court held that an executing court cannot sit over or expand the scope of the judgment it is implementing. It further held that where employees were initially hired without due process, they cannot claim regularization against specific posts if they do not meet the eligibility criteria prescribed by service rules framed by the department. The Court established that an implementation petition is not the appropriate forum to seek relief beyond the original grievance; if a grievance persists, a fresh grievance petition must be filed. Consequently, the impugned orders were set aside.

  Questions settled

  • Can an executing court grant relief in implementation proceedings that exceeds the scope of the original judgment or the parties' pleadings?
  • Does an employee hired without due process have an absolute right to regularization against a specific post if they do not meet the department's prescribed service eligibility criteria?
  • Is an implementation petition the correct legal remedy for an employee who believes their regularization was not performed according to their specific post requirements?
  • Does a workman who performs duties for more than three months against a post of permanent nature automatically attain the status of a permanent workman under the Industrial and Commercial Employment (Standing Order) Ordinance 1968?
  Read full judgment →
• Wartsila Pakistan (Pvt.) Limited through Authorized Representative vs Gul2023 CLD 1511 · Sindh High Court · 2019-04-05Read full judgment →
• Waqas Rasool and others vs Secretary School Education and others2023 PLC (C.S.) 484 · Lahore High Court · 2022-11-16
  service lawupgradationdemotionconditional appointmentjudicial reviewpolicy matterestoppel
  Summary & questions settled

  The petitioners, Data Entry Operators (BS-12) whose services were regularized, challenged a quasi-judicial order and a subsequent demotion order to Junior Computer Operator (BS-12). The petitioners argued they were entitled to remain as Computer Operators (BS-15) based on their qualifications and a specific clause in a Finance Department notification. The respondents contended that the petitioners were upgraded to BS-15 subject to specific terms and conditions, including a reversion clause if the Finance Department directed otherwise, which the petitioners had accepted via affidavit. The core legal question was whether the petitioners could challenge their reversion to BS-12 after accepting the conditional nature of their initial upgradation. The Court held that the petitioners, having accepted the conditional upgradation, could not resile from those terms. Furthermore, the Court affirmed that matters of policy regarding job qualifications and organizational structure fall within the discretion of the department, and courts should not interfere in such lawful policy decisions absent arbitrariness. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, upholding the department's authority to revert the petitioners based on the Finance Department's advice.

  Questions settled

  • Can a civil servant challenge a reversion order after having accepted the terms and conditions of an upgradation that included a specific reversion clause?
  • Does the court have the authority to interfere in departmental policy decisions regarding job qualifications and organizational restructuring?
  • Is a government department bound to maintain an upgraded post if the initial upgradation was granted subject to the condition of future reversal by the Finance Department?
  Read full judgment →
• Waqas Masim alias Sanwal vs The State2023 YLR 1988 · Balochistan High Court · 2022-11-02
  acid attackdying declarationmurdercriminal appealappreciation of evidencemedical evidenceforensic report
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal challenges the conviction of the appellant under Section 336-B and Section 302(b) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for an acid attack resulting in the victim's death. The core legal question was whether the prosecution established the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, particularly concerning the admissibility and evidentiary value of the victim's dying declaration and the sufficiency of ocular and medical evidence. The Balochistan High Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial court's conviction and life sentence. The Court held that the victim's statement, recorded by the police, qualified as a valid dying declaration under Article 46 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984. It established that a dying declaration, when credible and corroborated by medical and forensic evidence, serves as a strong, substantive piece of evidence sufficient for conviction without requiring further independent corroboration. Furthermore, the Court affirmed that when a specific defense plea is raised, the court must evaluate both versions in juxtaposition, finding the prosecution's evidence here to be consistent and reliable.

  Questions settled

  • Is a statement made by a victim to the police before death admissible as a dying declaration under the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984?
  • Does a dying declaration require independent corroboration to sustain a criminal conviction?
  • How should a court evaluate a specific defense plea when weighed against the prosecution's case?
  • Can a conviction be based on a dying declaration if it is supported by medical and forensic evidence?
  Read full judgment →
• Waqas Aslam and others vs Lahore Electric Supply Company Limited and others2023 SCMR 549 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 2022-12-07
  Recruitment policyEligibility criteriaJudicial reviewOverqualificationInstitutional autonomyEmployment lawService matters
  Summary & questions settled

  The petitioners sought appointment as Line Superintendent Grade-I at LESCO, which was denied due to their overqualification (BS Electrical Engineering) relative to the advertised requirement (Diploma in Associate Engineering). The core legal question concerned the extent of judicial review regarding an employer's right to set specific eligibility criteria and exclude overqualified candidates. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the employer possesses the autonomy to design recruitment policies and define necessary qualifications based on institutional needs. The Court affirmed that it is not the judiciary's function to determine the equivalence of academic degrees or to act as a human resource department. Furthermore, the Court established that restricting recruitment to specific qualifications is a valid policy decision that promotes social justice by preserving opportunities for targeted tiers of society. Consequently, the Court ruled that judicial review must tread warily regarding internal governance and policy decisions, and that recruitment must strictly adhere to the advertised criteria. The Court upheld the impugned judgment while allowing the petitioners' continued employment as a one-time concession.

  Questions settled

  • Can a court interfere with an employer's decision to set specific eligibility criteria for a post?
  • Does the possession of a higher qualification automatically make a candidate eligible for a post requiring a lower, specific qualification?
  • Is it within the jurisdiction of the court to determine the equivalence of academic qualifications for a job vacancy?
  • Does an employer's policy of excluding overqualified candidates constitute discriminatory practice?
  Read full judgment →
• Waqar Ali vs Addl. District Judge and others2023 LHC 330 · Lahore High Court · 2023-02-07Read full judgment →
• Waqar Ahmad vs Federation of Pakistan through Secretary, Establishment2023 IHC 210 · Islamabad High Court · 2023-01-12Read full judgment →
• Waqar & others, Muhammad Ashraf vs The State2023 SHC 882 · Sindh High Court · 2023-07-04
  pre-arrest bailpost-arrest bailfurther inquirytentative assessmentmurdercriminal jurisprudencebenefit of doubt
  Summary & questions settled

  This matter concerns concurrent applications for pre-arrest and post-arrest bail in a criminal case involving charges under Section 302, Section 337-A(i), and Section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, arising from an FIR where the cause of death remained undetermined due to the absence of a postmortem examination. The core legal question was whether the applicants were entitled to the concession of bail given the evidentiary gaps, specifically the lack of a postmortem and the alleged delay in lodging the FIR. The High Court confirmed the pre-arrest bail for one applicant and granted post-arrest bail to the others, holding that the case against them required further inquiry. The court affirmed that at the bail stage, the court must conduct a tentative assessment of the material to determine if reasonable grounds exist, without engaging in a deeper appreciation of evidence. It emphasized that the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and where the cause of death is undetermined, the benefit of doubt regarding the accused's involvement should be extended to them to avoid pre-trial punishment.

  Questions settled

  • Does the absence of a postmortem examination in a murder case constitute grounds for granting bail on the basis of further inquiry?
  • What is the scope of the court's power to conduct a tentative assessment of evidence during bail proceedings?
  • Can an accused be granted bail when the cause of death remains undetermined after a significant lapse of time?
  Read full judgment →
• Waqaf-Ul-Nabi and another vs The State and another2023 YLR 1436 · Sindh High Court · 2021-04-12
  criminal appealarmed robberymurderocular evidenceidentificationdeath sentencedeterrenceappreciation of evidence
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal arises from a conviction and death sentence imposed by the trial court for robbery and murder. The core legal questions concerned the reliability of ocular evidence, the necessity of a formal identification parade, and whether the prosecution successfully proved the charges beyond reasonable doubt. The High Court dismissed the appeals and upheld the convictions and death sentence. The court held that the ocular evidence provided by the complainant and an eyewitness was trustworthy, consistent, and corroborated by medical and forensic evidence. The court established that formal identification parades are not strictly required when accused persons are identified in daylight by victims who had ample opportunity to observe them, particularly when the accused are apprehended shortly after the incident. Furthermore, the court emphasized that in heinous crimes like armed robbery resulting in murder, deterrent sentencing is necessary to maintain societal order, and courts should not hesitate to impose maximum penalties when guilt is proven beyond doubt.

  Questions settled

  • Is a formal identification parade mandatory when the accused are identified by victims in daylight shortly after the commission of the crime?
  • Can the evidence of police witnesses be relied upon to corroborate the prosecution's case in a criminal trial?
  • Does the failure to hold an identification parade invalidate a conviction where the accused were identified by injured witnesses at the hospital shortly after the incident?
  • Is the death penalty an appropriate sentence for a pre-planned dacoity resulting in murder?
  Read full judgment →
• WAPDA, through Director (Legal) WAPDA, WAPDA House, Lahore and 22023 PLJ SC (AJ&K) 115 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and KashmirRead full judgment →
• Wapda, through Director (Legal) WAPDA and 2 others vs Allah Ditta and 22023 PLD Supreme Court (AJ&K) 41 · Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and KashmirRead full judgment →
• Wapda through Superintendent Engineer vs Land Acquisition Officer and 22023 YLR 2449 · Sindh High Court · 2022-04-06Read full judgment →
• Wapda through Chairman and others vs Alam Sher and others2023 SCP 103 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 2023-03-28
  land acquisitioncompensation enhancementmarket valuelocal commission reportcompulsory acquisitionKhyber Pakhtunkhwa amendment
  Summary & questions settled

  This appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, challenged a judgment of the Peshawar High Court upholding the enhancement of compensation for land acquired by Wapda for the construction of a drain. The core legal questions involved the legality of determining market value through a local commission relying on oral and documentary evidence, and the consideration of provincial amendments regarding the relevant date for assessing land value. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the concurrent findings of the lower forums regarding the market value and the report of the Local Commission were well-reasoned and based on proper appreciation of evidence, including mutations, two-year averages, and direct oral testimony consistent with the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984. The Court reaffirmed that under Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as amended by the province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the market value is determined on the date of taking possession, and new factual grounds not raised before lower forums cannot be urged for the first time in the apex court. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.

  Questions settled

  • Whether the market value of acquired land under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is to be determined from the date of the Section 4 notification or the date of taking possession?
  • Can a new ground or question of fact not raised before the lower courts be agitated for the first time before the Supreme Court in appellate jurisdiction?
  • Whether a local commission report based on both documentary evidence and direct oral testimony of local landowners is legally sustainable for assessing land compensation?
  • What relevant factors must be considered under Section 23 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 when determining the compensation and fair market value for compulsory land acquisition?
  Read full judgment →
• WaliUllah vs Muhammad Nauman Munawar, etc2023 IHC 400 · Islamabad High Court · 2023-02-16
  dishonoured chequeacquittal appealdouble presumption of innocencecriminal liabilityfinancial obligationSection 489-F PPC
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal was filed under Section 417(2-A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, challenging the acquittal of the respondent by the Judicial Magistrate in a case registered under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 regarding a dishonoured cheque. The core legal question was whether the trial court erred in acquitting the respondent given the evidence presented. The High Court upheld the acquittal, finding that the complainant’s own admissions during cross-examination revealed that a settlement had been reached between the complainant and the respondent’s father, involving the issuance of a replacement cheque that subsequently dishonoured, for which a separate FIR was registered. The Court held that the underlying financial obligation regarding the impugned cheque had been discharged by the replacement cheque, rendering the charge under Section 489-F groundless. Furthermore, the Court reiterated the established principle that an accused person acquitted by a competent court enjoys a double presumption of innocence, which cannot be dislodged without strong and cogent reasons, which were absent in this appeal.

  Questions settled

  • Does an accused person acquitted by a court of competent jurisdiction enjoy a double presumption of innocence?
  • Can a criminal charge under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 be sustained if the underlying financial obligation has been discharged by a replacement cheque?
  • What are the mandatory requirements to establish the offence of issuing a cheque with dishonest intention under Section 489-F of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
  Read full judgment →
• Wali Muhammad and another vs Shaukat Ali and 7 others2023 PLD Lahore 81 · Lahore High Court · 2022-01-31Read full judgment →
• Walayat Ali vs Safeer Hussain Shah and 4 others2023 PLD High Court (AJK) 121 · High Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir · 2023-01-23Read full judgment →
• Wajid Shahbaz and 2 others vs Station House Officer (SHO), Police Station2023 MLD 304 · Gilgit Baltistan Chief Court · 2022-06-21
  quashment of FIRfundamental rightsfreedom of assemblymala fideabuse of processpeaceful protestSection 561-A CrPC
  Summary & questions settled

  This petition was filed under Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, seeking the quashment of an FIR registered against the petitioners for alleged offenses including rioting, obstructing public servants, and causing damage to property. The petitioners contended that the FIR was lodged with mala fide intent by the local police to suppress a peaceful public protest against police inaction regarding a separate incident of vulgarity in a public park. The core legal question was whether the registration of an FIR against citizens exercising their fundamental right to protest, in the absence of evidence of violence or criminal intent, constitutes an abuse of the process of the court. The Court held that the right to peaceful assembly and demonstration is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution, which cannot be criminalized. Finding that the police failed to substantiate allegations of injury or violence and that the FIR was a retaliatory measure for the public's protest against police inefficiency, the Court quashed the FIR, establishing that the exercise of fundamental rights cannot be a ground for criminal prosecution.

  Questions settled

  • Can an FIR be quashed under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 if it is found to be lodged with mala fide intent?
  • Does the exercise of the fundamental right to peaceful protest constitute an offense under the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
  • Is the registration of an FIR against citizens protesting police inaction regarding a separate criminal investigation a valid exercise of police power?
  Read full judgment →
• Wajid Ali vs Learned Judicial Magistrate, etc.2023 PLJ Lahore 370 · Lahore High Court · 2022-11-21Read full judgment →
• Wajid Ali vs Judicial Magistrate, Okara and 2 others2023 CLC 1055 · Lahore High Court · 2022-11-21Read full judgment →
• Waheed Gul son of Abid Shah vs Rokhan Shah & others2023 PHC 235, 2024 PCRLJ 76 · Peshawar High Court · 2023-03-07
  acquittalSection 249-A Cr.P.C.due processcriminal appealprosecution evidenceremandArticle 10A
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal challenged an acquittal order passed by a Judicial Magistrate under Section 249-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The appellant, a complainant in a case involving criminal intimidation and assault, contended that the trial court prematurely acquitted the respondents without recording the testimonies of essential prosecution witnesses, specifically the medical officer and the Investigating Officer. The core legal question was whether the trial court correctly invoked Section 249-A Cr.P.C. to terminate the proceedings before the conclusion of the prosecution's evidence. The Peshawar High Court held that the trial court's action was unsustainable, as it bypassed the due process requirements mandated by Article 10A of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973. The Court established that Section 249-A Cr.P.C. should not be used to dispose of cases on merits when there is a reasonable probability of conviction. Consequently, the acquittal order was set aside, and the case was remanded for trial on merits, with a directive to ensure the attendance of necessary witnesses. The judgment reinforces that courts must exhaust legal methods to procure evidence before entertaining applications for premature acquittal.

  Questions settled

  • Can a trial court invoke Section 249-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 to acquit an accused before recording the testimony of essential prosecution witnesses?
  • Does the premature acquittal of an accused without exhausting the process of summoning witnesses violate the right to due process under Article 10A of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973?
  • Is a trial court permitted to decide a criminal case on merits via an application under Section 249-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when there is a probability of conviction?
  Read full judgment →
• Wahaj Ali and another vs The State2023 YLR 1293 · Sindh High Court · 2021-01-09
  criminal appealanti-terrorismpolice encounteridentification paradebenefit of doubtappreciation of evidencenighttime incident
  Summary & questions settled

  The appellants challenged their conviction and sentence passed by the Anti-Terrorism Court under Section 7(h) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 read with Sections 353, 324, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, along with separate convictions under Sections 337-F(iii) and 337-F(vi) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, arising from a police encounter where two police constables sustained injuries. The core legal questions involved the credibility of nighttime identification without a source of light, the absence of descriptive features in the FIR, and the failure of the prosecution to prove police presence through departure/arrival entries. The Sindh High Court allowed the appeals, set aside the convictions and sentences, and extended the benefit of the doubt to the appellants. The court held that an identification parade conducted without prior description of the accused in the FIR and in the absence of a specified source of light is the weakest piece of evidence, and that missing departure/arrival entries and unexplained failure to chase fleeing suspects fatally undermine the prosecution's case.

  Questions settled

  • What is the evidentiary value of an identification parade when the accused's physical descriptions and a source of light are missing from the FIR?
  • Does the failure of the prosecution to produce police station departure and arrival entries create a fatal flaw in the case?
  • What is the legal effect of the prosecution's failure to recover crime weapons and the alleged vehicle used in the commission of the offense?
  • Is the uncorroborated testimony of police officials sufficient to sustain a conviction in a sudden nighttime shootout without independent corroboration?
  Read full judgment →
• Wadhu Mal vs Province of Sindh through Principal Secretary Chief Minister2023 PLC (C.S.) 1310 · Sindh High Court · 2022-03-07
  proforma promotioncivil servicedepartmental negligencesuperannuationseniority listvested rightservice law
  Summary & questions settled

  The petitioner, a Superintendent Engineer (BPS-19), sought redress after being denied promotion to Chief Engineer (BPS-20) despite holding the first position in the seniority list. Although the competent authority had endorsed his promotion before his retirement, the respondent department failed to implement this directive, citing his subsequent superannuation as a bar to consideration. The core legal question was whether a civil servant, who was eligible for promotion during service but was denied consideration due to departmental negligence, could be granted proforma promotion after retirement. The Sindh High Court held that the petitioner could not be penalized for the department's lethargic attitude and failure to process his promotion in a timely manner. The Court ruled that where a civil servant's right to promotion accrues during service, departmental inaction cannot deprive them of that vested right, even post-retirement. The Court established that proforma promotion is a remedial mechanism to address losses sustained by civil servants due to administrative lapses, and ordered the respondents to grant the petitioner proforma promotion in BPS-20.

  Questions settled

  • Can a civil servant be granted proforma promotion after retirement if the right to promotion accrued during their service?
  • Does departmental inaction in processing a promotion constitute a valid ground to deny a civil servant their due promotion?
  • Is a civil servant entitled to promotion benefits if their case was not considered due to administrative negligence despite their eligibility?
  Read full judgment →
• Vicky Kumar vs The State2023 YLR 1452 · Sindh High Court · 2020-11-17
  narcotics possessioncriminal appealpolice witness reliabilitychain of custodychemical examiner reportminor contradictionslife imprisonment
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal challenged the conviction of the appellant for the possession of 35 kilograms of charas, resulting in a sentence of life imprisonment under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The core legal questions concerned the reliability of police testimony in the absence of independent witnesses, the impact of minor evidentiary contradictions, and the sufficiency of the prosecution's proof. The Sindh High Court dismissed the appeal, maintaining the conviction. The court held that the prosecution successfully established an uninterrupted chain of custody and that the forensic report corroborated the recovery. The court affirmed the principle that minor contradictions in witness statements do not undermine the prosecution's case if the evidence remains confidence-inspiring. Furthermore, it was held that police officials are competent witnesses whose testimony does not require independent corroboration absent evidence of personal animosity. Finally, the court emphasized that the recovery of a substantial quantity of narcotics renders the defense of false implication highly improbable, and procedural technicalities should not be prioritized over the substantive proof of guilt in narcotics cases.

  Questions settled

  • Does the absence of independent public witnesses invalidate the testimony of police officials in narcotics cases?
  • Do minor contradictions in the evidence of prosecution witnesses necessitate the acquittal of an accused?
  • Is the recovery of a substantial quantity of narcotics sufficient to rebut a defense of false implication by police?
  • Are the procedural rules regarding the transmission of samples to a chemical examiner directory or mandatory in nature?
  Read full judgment →
• Veero vs The State2023 SHC 852 · Sindh High Court
  murderdeath sentencered-handed arrestocular evidencepolice witnessesappreciation of evidencecriminal appeal
  Summary & questions settled

  This matter involves criminal appeals against a judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge convicting the appellants for the murder of two children. The core legal questions concerned whether the prosecution successfully established guilt beyond reasonable doubt based on the ocular testimony of police officials who arrested the appellants at the scene, and whether the conviction could be sustained despite the absence of private witnesses. The Court held that the prosecution proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, dismissing the appeals and confirming the death sentence for the primary appellant. The Court laid down that the quality of evidence, not the quantity, is paramount, and a conviction can be validly based on the testimony of a single reliable eyewitness. Furthermore, police officials are competent witnesses whose testimony is admissible and reliable if it remains un-shattered during cross-examination. The Court clarified that the rule of corroboration is a rule of abundant caution, not a mandatory requirement, and that medical evidence serves to confirm ocular accounts rather than independently establish the identity of the offender.

  Questions settled

  • Can a conviction be based on the testimony of a single eyewitness?
  • Is the evidence of police officials reliable in a criminal trial?
  • Does the rule of corroboration apply as a mandatory rule in all criminal cases?
  • What is the evidentiary value of medical evidence in establishing the identity of an offender?
  Read full judgment →
• Uzma Tahrim and others vs Habib Bank Limited and others2023 CLD 404 · Lahore High Court · 2022-10-18Read full judgment →
• Usman Saad vs The Additional District Judge, Islamabad (West) and 52023 CLC 421 · Islamabad High Court · 2022-09-12Read full judgment →
• Usman Ghani S/O Fazal Haqani vs The State2023 SHC 522 · Sindh High Court · 2023-07-05Read full judgment →
• Usman Ghani and 2 others vs Rawalpindi Metropolitian through Chief2023 CLC 1826 · Lahore High Court · 2022-07-23Read full judgment →
• Usman Ali Maqbool vs The State & another2023 LHC 4918, PLJ 2024 Cr.C. 466, 2024 YLR 762 · Lahore High Court · 2023-09-21
  post-arrest bailcross-versiondeclaration of innocenceCCTV footagetentative assessmenthomicidefirearm injuries
  Summary & questions settled

  Usman Ali Maqbool petitioned the Lahore High Court for post-arrest bail in a case registered under Sections 302, 324, 337-F (v) and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 arising from an incident involving multiple casualties and firearm injuries. The core legal questions revolved around the effect of a cross-version supported by medical evidence and the evidentiary value of a police finding of innocence based on tamper-free CCTV footage. The court held that where a case involves two conflicting versions supported by record and investigation, the question of aggression is best left for the trial court, and a police declaration of innocence supported by confidence-inspiring material like verified CCTV footage warrants the grant of post-arrest bail. The key principle laid down is that while police opinions are not binding, an opinion favoring the accused based on tangible scientific and video evidence corroborated by record creates sufficient further inquiry to justify enlarging the accused on bail.

  Questions settled

  • Whether post-arrest bail can be granted in a criminal case where the parties have presented conflicting cross-versions of the incident?
  • Does a police opinion declaring an accused innocent during investigation justify the grant of bail when based on confidence-inspiring material?
  • Can CCTV video clips having legal admissibility under the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984 be considered at the bail stage?
  • Is the opinion of an Investigating Officer binding upon the court during the adjudication of a bail petition?
  Read full judgment →
• Usama Bin Maalik vs Federal Public Service Commission through its2023 LHC 5972 · Lahore High Court · 2023-11-08Read full judgment →
• Universal Track (Pvt.) Ltd. through authorized Representative and others vs Federation of Pakistan through Ministry of Petroelum and others2023 CLC 1739 · Sindh High Court · 2021-07-21Read full judgment →
• Universal Logistics (Pvt.) Ltd vs National Database And Registration Auth &2023 SHC 110 · Sindh High Court · 2023-02-28Read full judgment →
• United Bank Ltd. vs Federation of Pakistan and others2023 PLJ Karachi 140 · Sindh High Court · 2023-08-17Read full judgment →
• United Bank Ltd. Etc vs Chairman, Plat, Lahore etc2023 LHC 2179, 2025 PLJ Lahore 164 · Lahore High Court · 2023-04-11
  advance incrementsrepeal of rulesservice ruleslabor appellate tribunalconstitutional jurisdictioncorporate representation
  Summary & questions settled

  This constitutional petition arose from a dispute where respondent No.3, an employee of United Bank Limited, sought two advance increments for improving educational qualifications based on the United Bank Limited (Staff) Service Rules, 1999. The Labour Court accepted the grievance petition, and the Punjab Labour Appellate Tribunal dismissed the Bank's appeal, prompting the Bank to approach the Lahore High Court. The core legal question was whether an employee can claim benefits under service rules that stood repealed prior to the maturation or issuance of the qualifying result card. The Lahore High Court held that since the Rules of 1999 were repealed prior to the issuance of the employee's result card, no right to the increments had matured under the repealed rules, and the labor fora erred in granting relief. The Court established that the repeal of service rules extinguishes claims dependent thereon unless a vested right accrued prior to the repeal, and an appellate tribunal must independently evaluate the controversy rather than perfunctorily affirming flawed lower forum decisions.

  Questions settled

  • Whether an employee can claim benefits under service rules that have been expressly repealed prior to the issuance of the qualifying examination result?
  • Does the repeal of service rules revive or sustain claims for benefits that had not matured prior to such repeal?
  • Whether a banking company can institute legal proceedings through officers authorized by a power of attorney without a specific board resolution?
  • Is an appellate labor tribunal required to independently analyze and decide issues rather than merely endorse the lower court's findings?
  Read full judgment →
• United Bank Limited vs Muhammad Usman Arshad and another2023 PLC (C.S.) 1111 · Lahore High Court · 2022-01-27
  constitutional petitionmaintainabilityprivate bankprivatizationState Bank of Pakistanregulatory bodyservice mattersmaster and servant
  Summary & questions settled

  This Intra Court Appeal challenges an order passed by a Single Bench of the Lahore High Court in a constitutional petition, whereby a direction was issued to the State Bank of Pakistan to decide a departmental representation of a terminated employee of United Bank Limited. The core legal questions involve the maintainability of a constitutional petition against a privatized banking company and the jurisdiction of the State Bank of Pakistan to adjudicate service disputes or issue directions regarding terms and conditions of employees of private banks. The Court held that since United Bank Limited was privatized and the State or Federation holds no financial interest or controlling affairs in it, the bank is a private entity and not amenable to the constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973. Furthermore, the State Bank of Pakistan acts merely as a regulatory body under the Banking Companies Ordinance 1962 and possesses no statutory duty or jurisdiction to interfere in the service matters or employment terms of private bank employees. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the impugned order of the Single Bench was set aside.

  Questions settled

  • Whether a constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 is maintainable against United Bank Limited after its privatization?
  • Does the State Bank of Pakistan have the jurisdiction under the Banking Companies Ordinance 1962 to adjudicate service disputes or issue directions regarding the terms and conditions of employees of private banks?
  • Can a writ of mandamus be issued against a private banking entity performing no functions in connection with the affairs of the Federation or a Province?
  Read full judgment →
• United Bank Limited vs Mian Aslam Javed and 6 others2023 CLD 121 · Lahore High Court · 2020-10-01Read full judgment →
• United Bank Limited through President vs Full Bench National Industrial2023 PLC 5 · Islamabad High Court · 2022-10-21
  workmanpower of attorneygrievance petitionNational Industrial Relations Commissionmaster and servantmanagerial capacityback benefitstermination of service
  Summary & questions settled

  The petitioner bank challenged an order passed by the Full Bench of the National Industrial Relations Commission (N.I.R.C.) which had reinstated respondent No.2 in service with back benefits after setting aside the dismissal of his grievance petition. The core legal question was whether an employee holding the designation of Officer Grade-III, in whose favour a power of attorney conferring managerial and supervisory powers had been executed, falls within the definition of a 'workman' under labour laws so as to maintain a grievance petition against termination. The Islamabad High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the Full Bench's order, and restored the N.I.R.C. Member's order dismissing the grievance petition. The court held that the execution of a power of attorney granting managerial and administrative powers removes an employee from the ambit of a 'workman', regardless of whether the powers were actively exercised or physically delivered. The key principle laid down is that the nature of powers conferred via a power of attorney determines the status of an employee, precluding them from claiming the status of a workman under industrial relations and labour legislation.

  Questions settled

  • Does an employee holding a power of attorney that confers managerial and supervisory powers cease to be a workman under labour laws?
  • Is actual exercise or physical delivery of a power of attorney a prerequisite for determining whether an employee is excluded from the definition of a workman?
  • Where does the burden of proof lie when an employee approaches a court or tribunal claiming the status of a workman?
  • Does a mere designation or emolument determine an employee's status as a workman or do the actual duties and conferred powers govern?
  Read full judgment →
• United Bank Limited (UBL) through its President and others vs Jamil Ahmed2023 SCP 350, 2024 SCMR 164, 2024 PLC 50, PLJ 2023 SC (Cr.C.) 1 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 2023-10-06
  employment statusworkmanmanagerial dutiesburden of proofIndustrial Relations Actconcurrent findingsremand of matterappellate jurisdiction
  Summary & questions settled

  This civil petition for leave to appeal arises from the dismissal of a writ petition by the Islamabad High Court, which had affirmed the orders of the Full Bench of the National Industrial Relations Commission and the Labour Court reinstating the respondent employee into service. The core legal question pertained to the employment status of the respondent—specifically whether he was a 'workman' or 'worker' under the Industrial Relations Act, 2012, or whether he was performing managerial or supervisory duties, given that he served as a Branch Manager and faced allegations of unauthorized withdrawals. The Supreme Court held that the determination of an employee's status depends on the pith and substance of their actual duties rather than the mere nomenclature of their post, and that the burden of proof lies upon the employee to substantiate their status. The Court found that the lower fora and the High Court had failed to properly advert to crucial oral and documentary evidence regarding admissions made by the respondent. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the impugned judgments were set aside, and the matter was remanded to the NIRC for a fresh decision.

  Questions settled

  • Whether the determination of an employee's status as a workman depends on the nomenclature of the post or the actual nature of duties performed?
  • Upon whom does the burden of proof lie to establish that an employee is a workman when such status is disputed by the management?
  • Can concurrent findings of lower fora be interfered with by the High Court under constitutional jurisdiction if they suffer from non-reading or misreading of evidence?
  • What is the scope of powers of the Full Bench of the National Industrial Relations Commission under Section 59 of the Industrial Relations Act, 2012?
  Read full judgment →
• Union Fabrics Private Limited and others vs Federation of Pakistan through Chairman, Economic Co-ordination Committee, Islamabad and others2023 PLD Sindh 270 · Sindh High Court · 2023-05-09Read full judgment →
• Ummaira Saleem vs Federation of Pakistan and others2023 LHC 4642, 2023 PLD Lahore 731, 2023 PLJ Lahore 919 · Lahore High Court · 2023-09-26Read full judgment →
• Umer Perwaiz and others vs Capital Development Authority and another2023 IHC 200, 2024 CLC 419 · Islamabad High Court · 2023-11-15Read full judgment →
• Umer Khan & others vs Member Board of Revenue & others2023 PHC 277, 2023 PLJ Peshawar 202 · Peshawar High Court · 2023-04-27Read full judgment →
• Umer Farooq vs The State & another2023 PHC 470 · Peshawar High Court · 2023-10-26Read full judgment →
• Ume Jameela vs Province of Punjab and others2023 PLC (C.S.) 1507 · Lahore High Court · 2022-01-19
  regularization of servicecontract employeevested rightfundamental rightsequality before lawpolicy decisionlachesconstitutional petition
  Summary & questions settled

  This matter involves constitutional petitions filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan, challenging the refusal of authorities to regularize the contract services of the petitioners, who were appointed as Educators (Sci-Math), while regularizing the services of other similarly appointed persons. The core legal questions relate to whether contract employees have a vested right to regularization, whether the exclusion of candidates with a third division in academic qualifications constitutes unconstitutional discrimination, and whether courts can interfere in policy decisions regarding job criteria. The Lahore High Court dismissed the petitions, holding that contract employees whose terms expire carry no vested right to remain in employment or to have their contracts extended. The court held that distinguishing between candidates based on academic qualifications (requiring at least a second division) is a valid, reasonable classification under the principle of equality and does not amount to arbitrary discrimination. Furthermore, the court emphasized that setting job qualifications and recruitment policies is the exclusive domain of the executive department and immune from judicial interference unless capricious.

  Questions settled

  • Does a contract employee whose period of employment expires by efflux of time carry any vested right to remain in employment or seek mandatory regularization?
  • Whether exclusion of candidates having a third division in academic qualifications from regularization, while regularizing others who meet the second division criteria, constitutes unconstitutional discrimination under Article 25 of the Constitution?
  • Can constitutional courts interfere in policy matters and prescribe eligibility or academic qualifications for a public sector job?
  • Does the principle of laches apply when a departmental order is challenged after an inordinate delay without a convincing cause?
  Read full judgment →
• Umar Farooq vs Province of Punjab and others2023 LHC 5905 · Lahore High Court · 2023-10-23Read full judgment →
• Umar Asghar Qureshi, Basar Ali vs Federation of Pakistan and 03 others2023 LHC 6328, 2024 PLC (C.S.) 640 · Lahore High Court · 2023-12-08
  constitutional petitionmaintainabilityservice rulesnon-statutory rulesmaster and servantdisciplinary proceedingsnationalized bank
  Summary & questions settled

  This judgment addresses constitutional petitions filed by employees of the National Bank of Pakistan challenging their concurrent dismissal orders arising from disciplinary proceedings. The core legal question revolves around whether the National Bank of Pakistan (Staff) Service Rules, 2021 are statutory in nature, thereby determining the maintainability of the constitutional petitions under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973. The court held that the Rules of 2021, framed by the Board of Directors without the prior approval of the Federal Government following the repeal of the statutory Rules of 1973, are non-statutory. Consequently, the aggrieved employees cannot invoke the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court. The key principle laid down is that an executive or corporate board empowered under overarching management provisions can frame non-statutory service rules once previous statutory rules are validly repealed, rendering service disputes under such non-statutory rules non-amenable to writ jurisdiction.

  Questions settled

  • Whether the National Bank of Pakistan (Staff) Service Rules, 2021 are statutory or non-statutory in nature?
  • Can employees governed by non-statutory service rules invoke the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 199 of the Constitution?
  • What is the effect of the repeal of the statutory National Bank of Pakistan (Staff) Service Rules, 1973 by the Federal Government?
  Read full judgment →
• Umar Ali vs The State etc2023 PHC 311 · Peshawar High Court · 2023-08-07Read full judgment →
• Umama Islam and others vs The Province of the Punjab and others2023 LHC 5917 · Lahore High Court · 2023-11-08Read full judgment →
• Umair Qadeer s/o Qadeer Ahmed vs 1.Muhammad Nasir s/o Noor2023 SHC 319 · Sindh High CourtRead full judgment →
• Umair Khan vs Aamir Mehfroz-ur-Rehman & others2023 PHC 1 · Peshawar High Court · 2023-01-09Read full judgment →
• Umair Khan vs Aamir Mehfooz-Ur-Rehman and 10 others2023 PLD Peshawar 126 · Peshawar High Court · 2023-01-09Read full judgment →
• Umair Ishtiaq vs Station House Officer and 5 others2023 PCRLJ 340 · Lahore High Court · 2022-06-24
  Ex-officio Justice of Peacepower of arrestpolice investigationcross-versionconstitutional petitionjurisdictioncriminal procedure
  Summary & questions settled

  This constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973 challenged an order passed by the Ex-officio Justice of Peace directing the police to arrest the petitioner and others named in a criminal cross-version. The core legal question was whether an Ex-officio Justice of Peace is competent under section 22-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 to direct the police to arrest an accused person during an ongoing investigation. The Lahore High Court held that an Ex-officio Justice of Peace lacks the authority to order the arrest of a suspect or interfere with the investigative discretion of the police. Reaffirming the principle that arrest is not a sine qua non for investigation and must be based on sufficient incriminating material and judicial satisfaction of the investigating officer, the court set aside the impugned order as being without lawful authority and jurisdiction.

  Questions settled

  • Does an Ex-officio Justice of Peace have the authority under section 22-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 to direct the police to arrest a suspect?
  • Can the High Court or a Justice of Peace supervise or interfere with a criminal investigation conducted by the police?
  • Is the arrest of an accused person a mandatory prerequisite or sine qua non for conducting a police investigation?
  • What are the legal parameters governing the exercise of power by an Ex-officio Justice of Peace under section 22-A(6) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
  Read full judgment →
• Umair Azad vs The State2023 PCRLJ 1472 · Sindh High Court · 2021-09-15
  pre-arrest bailbail recallprohibitory clausetentative assessmenttheftmisuse of bail
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal bail application arises from a pre-arrest bail matter concerning the applicant accused of stealing gold bangles from a deceased person at a hospital, registered under Section 381 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the applicant was entitled to confirmation of pre-arrest bail despite being nominated in the FIR with a specific role, supported by CCTV footage, and having misused the concession by failing to join the investigation. The Sindh High Court dismissed the application, holding that the mere fact that an offence falls outside the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 does not automatically entitle an accused to bail, particularly when sufficient prima facie material, CCTV footage, and recovery connect him to the crime. The key principle laid down is that pre-arrest bail may be recalled when the accused is prima facie connected to the offense, has misused the concession of bail, and the case involves grave circumstances disentitling him to discretionary relief.

  Questions settled

  • Whether an accused is entitled to pre-arrest bail merely because the charged offence does not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
  • Can pre-arrest bail be recalled if the accused fails to join the investigation and is prima facie connected to the crime through CCTV footage and recovery?
  • What is the scope of tentative assessment of evidence while deciding a bail application?
  Read full judgment →
• Umair Ashraf vs The State2023 YLR 2072 · Sindh High Court · 2022-01-26
  circumstantial evidencebenefit of doubtcriminal appealmurder convictionunbroken chain of evidenceappreciation of evidenceidentification parade
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal challenged a conviction under sections 302 and 380 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, alongside a revision application seeking sentence enhancement. The appellant was convicted by the trial court for murder and theft based on circumstantial evidence. The core legal question was whether the prosecution had established an unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence sufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The High Court held that the prosecution failed to prove its case, citing significant contradictions in witness testimony, unreliable last-seen evidence, and doubtful recovery procedures. The Court emphasized that for a conviction based on circumstantial evidence, the prosecution must provide an unbroken chain of evidence connecting the accused to the crime; missing links render a conviction unsafe. Furthermore, the Court reiterated that the benefit of the doubt is a fundamental right of the accused, not a concession. Consequently, the Court set aside the conviction, acquitted the appellant, and dismissed the revision application, ruling that the prosecution failed to meet the requisite standard of proof.

  Questions settled

  • Can a conviction be sustained on circumstantial evidence where the prosecution fails to establish an unbroken chain of events connecting the accused to the crime?
  • Is the benefit of the doubt a matter of grace or a fundamental right of the accused in criminal proceedings?
  • Does the failure of the prosecution to hold an identification parade for witnesses who only had fleeting glances of the accused render the identification unreliable?
  • Can a conviction be based on evidence where there are major contradictions regarding the place of arrest and recovery of stolen property?
  Read full judgment →
• Umair Afzal vs The Additional Sessions Judge_Justice of Peace, Bahawalpur and three others2023 LHC 1865 · Lahore High CourtRead full judgment →
• Ubaid-ur-Rehman son of Molvi Hazrat Yousaf vs Government of KPK2023 PHC 147, 2024 PLC (C.S.) 218 · Peshawar High Court · 2023-03-29
  writ petitionPST appointmentUnion Council quotacut-off dateeligibility criteriaCNIC addressservice matter
  Summary & questions settled

  This writ petition was filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, seeking a direction to respondents to remove discrepancies in the petitioner's Computerized National Identity Card (CNIC) address entries and to appoint him as a Primary School Teacher (PST) (BPS-12) in Union Council Chattar Plain, District Mansehra. The core legal question was whether the petitioner, who obtained a new CNIC reflecting a different permanent address after the advertisement's cut-off date, was eligible for appointment against a quota reserved for that specific Union Council. The Court held that the petitioner was ineligible, noting that the relevant statutory criteria require candidates to belong to the Union Council of their permanent residence as mentioned in their CNIC and domicile at the time of application. Because the petitioner's previous CNIC showed a different address and his updated documents were procured after the prescribed cut-off date, the Court dismissed the petition. The key principle laid down is that eligibility for recruitment against Union Council-specific quotas is strictly determined by the permanent address recorded in official documents as of the advertisement's cut-off date.

  Questions settled

  • Can a candidate claim eligibility for a Union Council-specific post based on a CNIC address updated after the advertisement's cut-off date?
  • Does the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Appointment, Deputation, Posting and Transfer of Teachers, Lectures, Instructors, and Doctors, Regulatory Act, 2011 require candidates to belong to the Union Council of their permanent residence as mentioned in their CNIC?
  • Is a petitioner entitled to appointment as a Primary School Teacher if their permanent address at the time of the application's closing date does not match the required Union Council quota?
  Read full judgment →
• Ubaid Ullah and others vs Sarfaraz Khan and another2023 PHC 402, 2024 YLR 2597 · Peshawar High Court · 2023-09-18Read full judgment →
• Ubaid Khan son of Misal Khan vs The State through A.A.G2023 PHC 496, 2024 PCRLJ 1153 · Peshawar High Court · 2023-10-17
  criminal appealmurderocular evidencesentence reductionspur of the momentpremeditationSection 302 PPC
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and sentence of the appellant, Ubaid Khan, for the murder of his mother. The trial court had convicted the appellant under Section 302(b) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, sentencing him to life imprisonment. The core legal questions concerned the reliability of ocular testimony provided by family members residing in the same house and whether the sentence imposed was proportionate given the circumstances of the offense. The Peshawar High Court upheld the conviction, finding the ocular account of the inmates credible and corroborated by medical evidence and the recovery of the weapon. However, the Court held that because the offense occurred at the spur of the moment without premeditation, and considering the appellant’s subsequent conduct in attempting to aid the victim, the sentence of life imprisonment was excessive. Consequently, the Court altered the conviction to Section 302(c) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and reduced the sentence to ten years imprisonment. The principle established is that lack of premeditation and the "spur of the moment" nature of an offense warrant a reduction in sentence.

  Questions settled

  • Can the testimony of family members residing in the same house be considered reliable ocular evidence in a murder trial?
  • Does the absence of premeditation and the occurrence of a crime at the 'spur of the moment' justify a reduction in sentence from life imprisonment to a fixed term?
  • Is medical evidence considered confirmatory or primary in the presence of reliable ocular testimony?
  Read full judgment →
• Ubaid alias K-2 and another vs The State2023 MLD 782 · Sindh High Court · 2021-10-11
  identification paradedelay in identification paradehuliachance witnessconfession in police custodybenefit of doubtmedical evidenceanti-terrorism
  Summary & questions settled

  The appellants challenged their conviction and life sentences passed by the Anti-Terrorism Court under Section 302(b)/34, PPC read with Section 7(a), Anti-Terrorism Act 1997, regarding the murder of two police officers in 2000. The prosecution relied primarily on an identification parade conducted 15 years post-incident by a single eye-witness, medical evidence, and extrajudicial confessions made to police officers during interrogation. The High Court evaluated the reliability of the sole chance witness who provided no prior physical description (hulia) in his Section 161, Cr.P.C. statement. The Court held that an identification parade conducted after a 15-year delay without previous physical features being recorded is inconsequential and unreliable. Additionally, confessions made in police custody are inadmissible, and medical evidence cannot identify perpetrators. Reaffirming the fundamental rule that a single reasonable doubt entitles an accused to acquittal as a matter of right, the High Court allowed the appeals, set aside the convictions, and acquitted the appellants.

  Questions settled

  • Can an identification parade be safely relied upon where the eye-witness failed to provide the physical description (hulia) of the accused in their initial statement to the police?
  • What is the evidentiary value of an identification parade conducted after a prolonged delay of 15 years?
  • Are confessions made by an accused while in police custody admissible as substantive evidence against them?
  • Does medical evidence alone suffice to establish the identity of the accused in the absence of reliable eye-witness testimony?
  Read full judgment →
• Tufail Hussain Shah vs Tatheer Hussain Shah & others2023 IHC 102 · Islamabad High Court · 2023-08-22Read full judgment →
• Tufail Ahmed Shaikh vs Federation of Pakistan through Secretary2023 PLC (C.S.) 202 · Sindh High Court · 2022-01-17
  service lawtransfer and postingNational Highway Authorityadministrative prerogativemala fide exercise of powertenure of postingstatutory rules
  Summary & questions settled

  The petitioner, an employee of the National Highway Authority (NHA), challenged his transfer from Karachi to Lahore, alleging mala fide and violation of the NHA Regulations for Appointments, Promotions and Transfers regarding tenure. The core legal question was whether the transfer order violated statutory service rules or constituted a colourable exercise of power. The Court held that the transfer was a valid exercise of administrative prerogative. It observed that the NHA Employees Service Rules, 1995, and the NHA Code, 2005, explicitly grant the competent authority the power to transfer employees to any office under its administrative control. Furthermore, the Court found that the tenure protections cited by the petitioner did not apply to his position as a Member Technical. The Court established the principle that where service rules or terms of appointment expressly authorize the competent authority to transfer an employee to any subordinate office, such transfers are an inherent part of service conditions and cannot be challenged as mala fide absent concrete evidence, particularly when the employee's own service history demonstrates frequent transfers.

  Questions settled

  • Does the National Highway Authority have the statutory power to transfer its employees to any subordinate office in Pakistan?
  • Are Members of the National Highway Authority subject to the three-year tenure rule for postings?
  • Can a transfer order be challenged as a colourable exercise of power if the employee's own service history shows frequent transfers?
  Read full judgment →
• Trading Corporation of Pakistan vs Continental Cargo Service2023 SHC 1102 · Sindh High Court · 2023-09-18Read full judgment →
• Toti Rahman and 6 others vs The State and 8 others2023 YLR 2534 · Peshawar High Court · 2023-02-06Read full judgment →
• Toti Rahman & 06 others vs The State & 08 others2023 PHC 111 · Peshawar High Court · 2023-02-06Read full judgment →
• Total Parco Pakistan Ltd. and Total Oil Pakistan (Pvt.) Ltd vs Not2023 CLD 241 · Sindh High Court · 2022-09-28Read full judgment →
• Total Parco Pakistan Limited through Authorized Officer vs Pakistan Civil2023 YLR 1616 · Sindh High Court · 2022-11-16Read full judgment →
• Tola Ram vs Nargis Baloch Editor Daily Intekab and others2023 PLJ Quetta 125, 2024 MLD 541 · Balochistan High Court · 2022-06-29Read full judgment →
• TMO Haripur vs Malik Abdul Rahim2023 PHC 36 · Peshawar High Court · 2023-02-06Read full judgment →
• TMA Haripur vs Raja Khan etc2023 PHC 84 · Peshawar High Court · 2023-02-27Read full judgment →
• Tipu Salman Makhdoom, etc vs Province of Punjab, Etc2023 LHC 87 · Lahore High Court · 2023-01-25Read full judgment →
• The State, Taha Azaam Ullah, Adnan Abdullah Khan vs Taha Azaam Ullah, The State, etc, Junaid Ahmad Khan, etc2023 LHC 3712, 2024 MLD 359 · Lahore High Court · 2023-06-26
  murderbenefit of doubtFIR registrationchain of custodyinterested witnessesacquittaldeath sentencePolice Rules 1934
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for the murder of Shahzad Abdullah Khan. The prosecution relied on a private complaint and ocular testimony, alleging a motive related to a property dispute. Upon review, the Court found significant discrepancies in the prosecution's narrative, specifically regarding the timing of the FIR registration, which was not entered in the mandatory register under the Police Rules 1934 but was instead generated via a computer system without proper explanation. The Court also noted the absence of independent corroboration for the interested witnesses, the failure to prove the alleged motive, and the lack of chain-of-custody evidence for the recovered weapon and crime empties. Furthermore, the Court observed that the inquest report lacked the signatures of the alleged eyewitnesses, casting doubt on their presence. Consequently, the Court held that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction was set aside, the death sentence was not confirmed, and the appellant was acquitted. The Court also dismissed the petition against the acquittal of co-accused, citing the double presumption of innocence.

  Questions settled

  • Does the failure to register an FIR in the prescribed register under Rule 24.5 of the Police Rules 1934 create reasonable doubt regarding the prosecution's case?
  • Can a conviction be sustained when the prosecution fails to provide link evidence for the custody of recovered crime weapons and empties?
  • Does the failure to prove the alleged motive in a murder case entitle the accused to the benefit of doubt?
  • Is an acquittal order subject to interference when the prosecution fails to provide adequate incriminating evidence against the accused?
  Read full judgment →
• The State, Muhammad Shahbaz, Muhammad Shakir, Muhammad Rafique2023 LHC 1679 · Lahore High CourtRead full judgment →
• The State, Muhammad Rafique vs Muhammad Rafique, The State2023 LHC 5692 · Lahore High Court · 2023-11-06
  rapecapital sentencemitigating circumstanceseyewitness testimonymedical evidenceDNA reportcriminal appeal
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for the rape of an 11-month-old infant under Section 376(iii) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The prosecution alleged that the appellant abducted the infant from her home and was witnessed by the complainant and an eyewitness committing the act in nearby fields. The trial court convicted the appellant, relying on the testimonies of the complainant and the eyewitness, alongside medical evidence confirming a penetrative sexual assault. On appeal, the High Court evaluated the consistency of the prosecution witnesses and the medical evidence. While the Court upheld the conviction, finding the prosecution's case proved beyond reasonable doubt, it identified mitigating circumstances—specifically the negative DNA report and the appellant's age—that rendered the death penalty excessive. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal against conviction but commuted the death sentence to imprisonment for life, while maintaining the fine and compensation orders. The judgment reaffirms that consistent eyewitness testimony, corroborated by medical findings, is sufficient to establish guilt in sexual assault cases, even in the absence of positive DNA evidence.

  Questions settled

  • Is consistent eyewitness testimony, corroborated by medical evidence, sufficient to sustain a conviction for rape under Section 376(iii) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
  • Does a negative DNA report automatically entitle an accused to an acquittal in a rape case where other evidence is sufficient?
  • Can the appellate court commute a death sentence to imprisonment for life based on mitigating circumstances such as the age of the accused and the nature of the DNA evidence?
  • Is the benefit of Section 382(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 applicable to a convict whose death sentence has been commuted to life imprisonment?
  Read full judgment →
• The State, Muhammad Qasim, Muhammad Hashim, Liaqat Ali vs Muhammad Qasim, The State2023 LHC 3546, PLJ 2024 Cr.C. 124 · Lahore High CourtRead full judgment →
• The State, Muhammad Imran alias Aamir vs Muhammad Imran alias2023 LHC 1815 · Lahore High Court
  circumstantial evidencelast seen theorybenefit of doubtDNA profilingQatl-i-Amdcriminal appealmurder referenceforensic evidence
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for the Qatl-i-Amd of his wife. The case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, specifically the 'last seen' theory, the recovery of the dead body at the appellant's pointing, and forensic DNA evidence. The Court examined whether these circumstances formed a complete, unbroken chain of evidence leading exclusively to the guilt of the accused. The Court found significant contradictions in the prosecution's evidence, particularly regarding the timing of the recovery of the dead body and the presence of the appellant at the scene. Furthermore, the Court held that the DNA report was unreliable due to the lack of proper sealing and potential contamination during transit. The Court reiterated that circumstantial evidence must be incompatible with the innocence of the accused and that medical evidence is merely confirmatory, not substantive. Concluding that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, the Court acquitted the appellant, extending the benefit of the doubt as a matter of right.

  Questions settled

  • Can a conviction be sustained on circumstantial evidence if the chain of events is broken by material contradictions?
  • Is a DNA report admissible and reliable if the samples were not properly sealed and were subject to potential contamination?
  • Does medical evidence alone possess the probative force to identify an accused in a criminal case?
  • What is the legal standard for applying the 'last seen together' theory in a murder case?
  Read full judgment →
• The State, Mahnaz Ali vs Mahnaz Ali, The State and another2023 LHC 1641 · Lahore High Court · 2023-01-18
  chance witnessbenefit of doubtocular evidencemedical evidenceburden of proofQatl-i-Amdcriminal appealmatrimonial home
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for the murder of his wife, Memona Bibi, under Section 302(b) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal questions concern the credibility of 'chance witnesses,' the consistency between ocular and medical evidence, and the burden of proof when a death occurs within a matrimonial home. The Lahore High Court held that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The court found the eye-witnesses to be 'chance witnesses' who failed to provide a credible reason for their presence at the scene. Furthermore, the ocular account of manual strangulation was contradicted by medical evidence, and significant delays in reporting the crime and conducting the post-mortem suggested a fabricated narrative. The court reaffirmed the principle that the burden of proof rests solely on the prosecution and cannot shift to the accused merely because a death occurred in their home if the prosecution's case is otherwise demolished. Consequently, the conviction was set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.

  Questions settled

  • Can an accused be convicted solely on the presumption that a death occurred within their matrimonial home if the prosecution's evidence is otherwise unreliable?
  • Does the burden of proof shift to the accused under Article 122 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat 1984 if the prosecution fails to establish a prima facie case?
  • Is the testimony of 'chance witnesses' reliable when they fail to provide a credible explanation for their presence at the scene of the crime?
  • Does a significant delay in reporting a crime and conducting a post-mortem examination undermine the prosecution's case?
  Read full judgment →
• The State, Khuda Bakhsh and another, The State vs Khuda Bakhsh, The State and another, Muhammad Zafar Iqbal2023 LHC 2002, PLJ 2024 Cr.C. 201 · Lahore High CourtRead full judgment →
• The State, Khateeb Hussain, Zafar Hussain vs Khateeb Hussain, The State2023 LHC 1958 · Lahore High CourtRead full judgment →
• The State, Bilal Hassan vs Bilal Hassan, The State2023 LHC 411, PLJ 2024 Cr.C. 273, 2024 PCRLJ 729 · Lahore High Court · 2023-01-23
  benefit of doubtcriminal appealmurder convictionocular evidencedelayed FIRrecovery of weapondeath sentence confirmationacquittal
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal arises from a conviction and death sentence for Qatl-e-Amd and attempted murder. The core legal question is whether the prosecution established the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt, given significant inconsistencies in the FIR, ocular testimony, and forensic evidence. The Lahore High Court held that the prosecution failed to prove its case. The Court identified multiple fatal flaws: an unexplained delay in lodging the FIR, contradictory statements by eyewitnesses regarding the sequence of events and the reporting of the incident to the police, and discrepancies between the medical evidence and the ocular account. Furthermore, the Court found the recovery of the weapon of offence suspicious due to conflicting testimonies regarding the timing of the accused's arrest and the collection of crime empties. The Court reaffirmed the principle that the prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and any reasonable doubt must be resolved in favour of the accused as a matter of right. Consequently, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellant was acquitted.

  Questions settled

  • Does an unexplained delay in lodging an FIR and commencing investigation entitle the accused to the benefit of doubt?
  • Can a conviction be sustained when there is a material conflict between the ocular account and the medical evidence?
  • Is the recovery of a weapon of offence reliable when prosecution witnesses provide contradictory testimony regarding the timing of the accused's arrest and the collection of evidence?
  • Does an FIR lose its evidentiary value if it is lodged after conducting a preliminary police inquiry?
  Read full judgment →
• The State, Asjad Mehmood vs Asjad Mehmood, The State2023 LHC · Lahore High Court · 2023-03-15
  murder appealdeath sentencebenefit of doubtmedical and ocular conflictdelayed FIRabsconsioninterested witnesses
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and death sentence of the appellant under Section 302(b) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, along with a connected murder reference. The core legal questions involved the credibility of interested eyewitnesses, the presence of material contradictions between ocular and medical evidence, and the legal weight of absconsion when the substantive evidence fails. The Lahore High Court held that the prosecution miserably failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt due to severe discrepancies in the time of the FIR, delayed post-mortem examination suggesting police consultation, unconvincing motive, and a direct conflict between the ocular account and medical evidence. The key principle laid down is that minor or major contradictions that go to the root of the case, coupled with inconsistent medical testimony and delayed reporting, demolish the prosecution's case, and absconsion alone cannot form the basis of a conviction when the primary ocular evidence is disbelieved.

  Questions settled

  • Can a conviction for murder be sustained solely on the basis of the accused's absconsion when the substantive ocular account has been disbelieved?
  • Whether a severe conflict between ocular testimony and medical evidence is sufficient to demolish the prosecution's case?
  • Does an unexplained delay in lodging the FIR and conducting the post-mortem examination raise a strong presumption of afterthought and police consultation?
  Read full judgment →
• The State, Asad Ali vs Asad Ali, The State2023 LHC 5025 · Lahore High Court · 2023-09-25
  rapechild witnessocular evidenceDNA evidencecapital sentencemitigating circumstancescriminal appeal
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and death sentence imposed by the trial court under Section 376(3) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the rape of a minor. The core legal questions concerned whether the prosecution established guilt beyond reasonable doubt despite a negative DNA report and whether the capital sentence was appropriate. The Court held that the prosecution’s case, supported by the consistent testimony of the child victim and eyewitnesses, was credible and sufficient to sustain the conviction. The Court clarified that a negative DNA report does not automatically negate ocular evidence when the latter is trustworthy and corroborated. Furthermore, the Court emphasized that investigation flaws should not prejudice the rights of victims of sexual assault. Regarding sentencing, the Court ruled that even a single mitigating circumstance justifies commuting a death sentence to life imprisonment. Consequently, while maintaining the conviction, the Court dismissed the appeal regarding guilt but converted the death sentence to rigorous imprisonment for life, extending the benefit of Section 382(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.

  Questions settled

  • Can a conviction for rape be sustained on the basis of ocular evidence when the DNA report is negative?
  • Does the failure to record a witness statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 invalidate the prosecution's case?
  • Is a single mitigating circumstance sufficient to justify the commutation of a death sentence to life imprisonment?
  • Can the testimony of a child witness be relied upon without corroboration in a sexual assault case?
  Read full judgment →
• The State, Arshad Ali vs Arshad Ali, The State, etc2023 LHC 755 · Lahore High Court · 2023-02-20
  murder convictionbenefit of doubtcriminal appealchain of custodyforensic evidenceocular accountdeath sentenceFIR delay
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for the murder of the deceased under Section 302(b) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the prosecution successfully proved the appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, given the evidence presented. The Lahore High Court held that the prosecution's case was riddled with significant doubts, including an unexplained delay in FIR registration, material contradictions in the ocular account, and a failure to establish the chain of custody for forensic evidence. The court found the motive unproven and the recovery of the weapon suspicious. Consequently, the court set aside the conviction and death sentence, acquitting the appellant. The judgment reaffirms the principle that the prosecution bears the burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and any reasonable doubt must be resolved in favor of the accused as a matter of right, not grace, ensuring that no innocent person is convicted.

  Questions settled

  • Does an unexplained delay in the registration of an FIR create sufficient doubt to warrant the acquittal of an accused in a murder case?
  • Is the report of a forensic expert admissible under Section 510 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 without the examination of the person who collected the evidence?
  • Must the prosecution prove the chain of custody for crime scene evidence to rely on forensic reports?
  • Is an accused entitled to the benefit of doubt as a matter of right when the prosecution fails to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt?
  Read full judgment →
• The State, Abdul Jabbar vs Abdul Jabbar, The State2023 LHC 1914, PLJ 2024 Cr.C. 87 · Lahore High Court · 2023-03-08
  circumstantial evidencebenefit of doubtQatl-i-Amdburden of proofDNA evidencerigor mortismurder referencecriminal appeal
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and death sentence of the appellant for the Qatl-i-Amd of his wife. The case rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, including the discovery of the deceased's body in the appellant's shop where he was also found unconscious. The core legal question was whether the prosecution established a complete, unbroken chain of circumstances pointing exclusively to the appellant's guilt. The Lahore High Court held that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Key deficiencies included contradictory statements by prosecution witnesses regarding their presence at the scene, unexplained delays in the post-mortem examination, and the absence of the appellant's DNA on the murder weapon and the ligature used for his alleged suicide attempt. The court emphasized that the burden of proof remains on the prosecution and cannot shift to the accused merely because a death occurred in his premises. Consequently, the court acquitted the appellant, holding that any reasonable doubt must be resolved in his favor, and answered the murder reference in the negative.

  Questions settled

  • Can an accused be convicted solely on the basis of a presumption arising from the discovery of a dead body in his premises?
  • Does the burden of proof shift to the accused under Article 122 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat 1984 if the prosecution fails to establish its initial case?
  • Is a conviction sustainable when the chain of circumstantial evidence is broken by material contradictions and lack of forensic corroboration?
  • What is the legal effect of a delay in the post-mortem examination on the credibility of prosecution witnesses?
  Read full judgment →
• The State vs Waqar Ahmad and others2023 PLD Peshawar 1 · Peshawar High Court · 2022-06-09Read full judgment →
• The State vs Shazam Ali2023 LHC 124 · Lahore High Court · 2023-01-09
  murderrobberycapital sentence conversionres gestaecircumstantial evidencemitigating circumstancesmedical evidencelast seen evidence
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal and murder reference arise from a judgment convicting the appellant, Shazam Ali, under sections 302(b) and 392 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the murder and car robbery of the deceased, Shafique-ur-Rehman, sentencing him to death and imprisonment for life respectively. The prosecution case rested on last-seen evidence, circumstantial evidence, medical evidence, and rescue service records. The core legal questions involved the admissibility of statements made by the accused to rescue officials under the doctrine of res gestae, the appreciation of circumstantial and medical evidence, and the existence of mitigating circumstances justifying the commutation of a death sentence. The Lahore High Court held that the prosecution successfully established the appellant's presence and guilt beyond reasonable doubt based on consistent circumstantial evidence and contemporaneous rescue records admissible as part of the same transaction under Article 19-A of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984. However, finding doubts in the recovery of the weapon and noting extenuating circumstances surrounding the incident, the court dismissed the appeal on merits but converted the death sentence into imprisonment for life.

  Questions settled

  • Are statements made by an accused person to rescue emergency officials immediately after an incident admissible in evidence as part of the same transaction?
  • Whether doubtful recovery of a weapon of offense can serve as a mitigating circumstance to warrant the conversion of a death sentence into imprisonment for life?
  • Does the failure of an accused to summon caller records from a rescue service permit the court to draw an adverse inference under the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order 1984?
  • What quantum of mitigation is legally sufficient for awarding a lesser sentence of imprisonment for life instead of capital punishment?
  Read full judgment →
• The State vs Shafique Ahmed2023 LHC 5933, 2024 YLR 1174 · Lahore High Court · 2023-11-13
  acquittal under section 265-KPFSA analysis reportnarcotic substancepremature termination of prosecutionevidentiary valuecriminal appealforensic protocols
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal appeal was filed by the State against an order of acquittal passed by the trial court under Section 265-K of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The core legal question was whether the trial court correctly acquitted the accused based on the alleged insufficiency of protocols in the Punjab Forensic Science Agency (PFSA) analysis report before evidence was formally recorded. The High Court set aside the acquittal, holding that the trial court erred by prematurely terminating the prosecution. The Court found that the PFSA report contained sufficient information and that the trial court should not have anticipated the evidentiary value of the report before it was tendered or evidence was led. The principle laid down is that Section 265-K of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 does not permit the premature termination of proceedings based on anticipated evidentiary deficiencies. The prosecution must be afforded the opportunity to lead evidence, and the court should not speculate on the sufficiency of forensic reports before they are formally admitted into evidence.

  Questions settled

  • Can a trial court acquit an accused under Section 265-K of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 based on the alleged insufficiency of a forensic report before evidence is recorded?
  • Is it mandatory for an appellate court to hear an accused in an appeal against acquittal if the accused does not appear?
  • Does the non-appearance of an accused prevent an appellate court from deciding an appeal against acquittal?
  Read full judgment →
• The State vs M/s Glaxo Smithkline Pak Ltd and 6 others2023 SHC 1086 · Sindh High Court · 2023-11-06
  acquittal appeallimitation perioddrug qualitychain of custodycondonation of delayDrugs Act 1976presumption of innocence
  Summary & questions settled

  This matter concerns acquittal appeals filed by the State against a judgment of the Drug Court, which acquitted the respondents of charges related to the sale of substandard drugs under the Drugs Act 1976. The core legal questions addressed were whether the appeals were time-barred under the special limitation provisions of the Drugs Act 1976 and whether the prosecution successfully established the chain of custody for the drug samples. The Court held that the appeals were time-barred, as they were filed 161 days late, and the State failed to demonstrate compelling circumstances to justify condonation under the special law, which prevails over the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Furthermore, on merits, the Court found the prosecution's case defective due to conflicting laboratory reports, improper storage conditions, and a failure to maintain an unbroken chain of custody for the samples. The Court affirmed that the scope of interference in acquittal appeals is limited, and the presumption of innocence is doubled upon acquittal. Consequently, the appeals were dismissed.

  Questions settled

  • Does the limitation period prescribed in Section 31(7-A) of the Drugs Act 1976 prevail over the general provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
  • Can an acquittal appeal be entertained if filed beyond the statutory limitation period without showing compelling circumstances?
  • Does a break in the chain of custody regarding drug samples invalidate the expert report in a prosecution under the Drugs Act 1976?
  • What is the scope of appellate interference in a judgment of acquittal?
  Read full judgment →
• The State vs Muswa r Hussain Shah, etc.2023 LHC 4674, PLJ 2024 Cr.C. 73 · Lahore High Court · 2023-09-14
  physical remandAnti-Terrorism Courtmandatory vs discretionaryinterpretation of statutesliberty of accusedcriminal revisionpolice custody
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal revision petition was filed by the State through the Prosecutor General Punjab against an order passed by the Duty Judge of the Anti-Terrorism Court, whereby the physical remand of the respondents was granted for two days instead of the minimum period contended by the State. The core legal question before the Lahore High Court was whether the power of an Anti-Terrorism Court to grant physical remand under Section 21-E of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 is mandatory or discretionary, specifically regarding the duration. The High Court held that the power to grant physical remand for not less than fifteen days is discretionary and not mandatory in nature, and it falls within the exclusive domain of the court to grant remand for a period it deems necessary based on the facts and circumstances of each case. The key principles laid down are that provisions curtailing liberty must be construed strictly in favor of the accused, that the word 'may' in Section 21-E confers discretion rather than an absolute mandate, and that physical remand cannot be granted in a mechanical manner without recording reasons.

  Questions settled

  • Is the power of an Anti-Terrorism Court to grant physical remand under Section 21-E of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 mandatory or discretionary?
  • Should penal provisions curtailing the liberty of a person be construed strictly in favor of the accused?
  • Can an Anti-Terrorism Court grant physical remand in a mechanical manner without recording reasons?
  • Does the use of the word 'may' in Section 21-E of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 impose an absolute duty to grant remand for a fixed minimum duration of fifteen days?
  Read full judgment →
• The State vs Muhammad Ishaque2023 LHC 1443 · Lahore High Court · 2023-03-22Read full judgment →
• The State vs Muhammad Altaf2023 LHC 6388, 2025 PLD Lahore 235 · Lahore High Court · 2023-11-14
  plea of guiltmid-trial confessionwaiver of rightssentencing discretionnarcotics controlfair trialjudicial efficiency
  Summary & questions settled

  The State appealed against a judgment convicting the respondent under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act 1997, challenging the trial court's decision to accept a plea of guilt mid-trial after the accused had initially denied the charge. The State also contested the leniency of the sentence. The core legal question was whether an accused can waive their right to a full trial and plead guilty at an intermediary stage. The Court held that there is no statutory prohibition against recording a plea of guilt at any stage of the trial, provided the court is satisfied the plea is voluntary. The Court affirmed that an accused may waive private rights, such as the right to a full trial, to expedite proceedings. Furthermore, the Court upheld the lenient sentence, applying the principle "Cum confitente sponte, mitius est agendum," noting that an accused who facilitates judicial efficiency by pleading guilty should be treated with leniency. The appeal was dismissed, confirming the validity of mid-trial plea recording and the discretionary sentencing power of the trial court.

  Questions settled

  • Can an accused person plead guilty at an intermediary stage of a trial after initially denying the charge?
  • Is a trial court empowered to accept a plea of guilt and convict an accused mid-trial without completing the full prosecution evidence?
  • Does the principle of 'Cum confitente sponte, mitius est agendum' justify a more lenient sentence for an accused who pleads guilty?
  • Is the right to a full trial an indefeasible right that cannot be waived by an accused person?
  Read full judgment →
• The State vs Chaudhry Muhammad Usman2023 SCP 205, 2023 SCMR 1676 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 2023-06-15
  production of documentsSection 94 CrPCSection 265-C CrPCSection 265-F(7) CrPCcriminal trialcross-examinationremand for fresh decision
  Summary & questions settled

  This petition for leave to appeal arose from a criminal prosecution under the Drug Regulatory Authority of Pakistan Act 2012 and the Drugs Act 1976. The respondent sought an order under Section 265-C read with Section 94 Cr.P.C. directing the complainant authority to produce 23 specified documents before the framing of charges. The trial court dismissed the application, holding that document supply was governed strictly by Section 265-C Cr.P.C. and defence evidence occurs later. The High Court reversed this order in revision, allowing the document production application directly. The Supreme Court held that under Section 94 Cr.P.C., an accused may apply for document production at any stage, including before trial or entering upon defence, provided the documents are shown to be necessary or desirable for the trial. It ruled that Section 265-F(7) Cr.P.C. does not limit or override Section 94 Cr.P.C. However, the High Court erred by allowing the application directly without examining whether each requested document was necessary or desirable. The Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal, remanding the application to the trial court for a fresh decision on document necessity.

  Questions settled

  • Can an accused apply under Section 94 Cr.P.C. for the production of documents before the commencement of trial?
  • Does Section 265-F(7) Cr.P.C. restrict or override the trial court's power under Section 94 Cr.P.C. to order production of documents before the defence stage?
  • Must a court determine whether each requested document is necessary or desirable for the trial before granting an application under Section 94 Cr.P.C.?
  Read full judgment →
• The State vs Ali Akbar, etc2023 LHC 4710 · Lahore High Court · 2023-09-18
  physical remandAnti-Terrorism Actcriminal revisionjudicial discretioninvestigation procedureremand extension
  Summary & questions settled

  This criminal revision petition challenged an order passed by the Anti-Terrorism Court, which refused to grant a further twenty-day physical remand of the respondent. The core legal question concerned the interpretation of Section 21-E of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, specifically whether the police are entitled to successive physical remands for different offenses arising from the same investigation. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the impugned order was legally sound. The Court established that remand is not to be granted mechanically; rather, the court must exercise judicious application of mind. It clarified that while Section 21-E(1) mandates an initial remand period of fifteen to thirty days, any extension under Section 21-E(2) requires the court to be satisfied that further evidence is likely and no bodily harm will occur. Crucially, the Court held that multiple offenses discovered during a single investigation constitute one investigation, and the police cannot seek separate physical remands for each offense, as this would defeat the legislative intent behind the statutory remand limits.

  Questions settled

  • Can the police seek separate physical remands for different offenses discovered during the course of a single investigation?
  • Is a court required to grant physical remand mechanically upon the request of the investigating officer?
  • What are the statutory requirements for the court to grant an extension of physical remand under the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997?
  Read full judgment →
• The State through Regional Director vs Farooq Khan2023 YLR 2264 · Balochistan High Court · 2023-06-15
  superdarinarcotics traffickingconfiscation of vehicleinnocent ownertemporary custodyControl of Narcotic Substances Actseized property
  Summary & questions settled

  This appeal challenged an order passed by the Special Judge (CNS), Balochistan, Quetta, which granted the release of a vehicle on superdari to the respondent, Farooq Khan, following its seizure by the Anti-Narcotics Force (ANF) in connection with a narcotics trafficking case. The core legal question was whether a vehicle seized under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, can be released to an owner who was not indicted in the criminal proceedings and claims ignorance of the illicit activity. The Court held that while Section 74 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, generally prohibits the release of vehicles used in narcotics trafficking, this bar does not apply to innocent owners who were unaware of the crime. Relying on established precedent, the Court affirmed that an owner who can demonstrate lack of knowledge regarding the misuse of their property is entitled to temporary custody. Finding no illegality in the Trial Court's decision to release the vehicle to the respondent, who provided evidence of a legitimate car rental business, the High Court dismissed the appeal in limine.

  Questions settled

  • Can a vehicle seized in a narcotics case be released on superdari to an owner who was not indicted in the criminal proceedings?
  • Does the prohibition under Section 74 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, against releasing seized vehicles apply to an innocent owner unaware of the crime?
  • What criteria must be met for a court to order the confiscation of a vehicle used in the trafficking of contraband under the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997?
  Read full judgment →
• The State through P.G Sindh vs Zameer @ Zamoo2023 SHC 1074 · Sindh High Court · 2023-10-26Read full judgment →
• The State through National Accountability Bureau vs Lutuf Ali Kaliioro and 52023 YLR 1357 · Sindh High Court · 2021-11-24
  appeal against acquittaldouble presumption of innocenceadverse inferencematerial witnessaccountability referenceland exchangecorruption
  Summary & questions settled

  This appeal was filed by the State through the National Accountability Bureau under Section 32 of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, challenging an acquittal judgment passed by an Accountability Court. The core legal questions concerned whether the acquittal was justified given the prosecution's failure to examine material witnesses and whether the evidence sufficiently established the alleged offences. The High Court upheld the acquittal, holding that the trial court’s findings were based on sound reasoning. The Court emphasized that the prosecution’s failure to produce the complainant and other material witnesses warranted an adverse inference under Article 129 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984. Furthermore, the Court noted that the accused had not obtained any monetary gain from the land exchange, and the lady accused acted in a private capacity. The Court reiterated the principle that the scope of interference in an appeal against acquittal is narrow and limited, as the accused enjoys a double presumption of innocence. Consequently, the appellate court refused to disturb the trial court's decision, finding no perversity or gross violation of law in the original judgment.

  Questions settled

  • What is the legal effect of the prosecution's failure to examine material witnesses on the outcome of a criminal trial?
  • What is the scope of appellate interference in a judgment of acquittal?
  • Does the absence of proven monetary gain in a land exchange case negate the ingredients of an offence under the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999?
  Read full judgment →
• The State through Deputy Director Law, Regional Directorate AntiNarcotics2023 SCP 232, 2023 SCMR 1709 · Supreme Court of Pakistan · 2023-03-24
  Review PetitionForfeiture of PropertyForeign ConvictionNarcoticsRetrospective ApplicationMisleading the CourtImposition of Costs
  Summary & questions settled

  The petitioner, representing the State through the Anti-Narcotics Force, filed a review petition against the Supreme Court's judgment dated 15.01.2020 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 01-L of 2015. The underlying judgment had declared the forfeiture of the respondent's properties unlawful under Section 37 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Ordinance, 1995. The petitioner primarily contended that the matter stood previously dismissed on 24.08.2009 and could not have been decided through the judgment under review, and alternatively argued that the assets could have been forfeited under the Dangerous Drugs Act, 1930. The Supreme Court dismissed the review petition, holding that the earlier dismissal had already been reviewed and the criminal petition revived, making the counsel's assertion an attempt to mislead the Court. Furthermore, the Court held that Section 35-C of the Dangerous Drugs Act, 1930 did not contemplate foreign convictions, a concept only introduced in 1995 via Section 37 of the Ordinance, which could not apply retrospectively to a 1993 foreign conviction. The Court imposed costs of Rs. 10,000/- on petitioner's counsel for misleading the Court.

  Questions settled

  • Can property be forfeited under Section 37 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Ordinance 1995 on the basis of a foreign conviction handed down prior to the promulgation of the Ordinance?
  • Does Section 35-C of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1930 envisage forfeiture of property on the basis of a foreign conviction?
  • Can a party re-argue merits and raise previously addressed legal arguments within the review jurisdiction of the Supreme Court?
  Read full judgment →