sharif2uys/supreme-court-of-pak-judgments huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik 
Mr. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Criminal Appeal No.12-P/2013 
(Against 
the 
judgment 
dated 
23.01.2007 passed by the Peshawar 
High Court, Peshawar in Criminal 
Appeal No.632 of 2005). 
 
State thr. Deputy Attorney General 
…Appellant(s) 
VERSUS 
Abdul Ali 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Appellant(s) 
: Mr.Manzoor Khan Khalil,  
Additiional Advocate General, 
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 
Mr.Tariq Khan, ASC 
 
 
 
For the Respondent(s) 
: Mr. Noor Alam Khan, ASC 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 29.04.2019 
 
JUDGMENT 
  
 
Abdul Ali, respondent was returned a guilty verdict by 
learned Judge, Special Court (CNS), Peshawar; he was indicted for 
being in possession of seventeen kilograms of opium at an FC 
check post. The learned Peshawar High Court, however, acquitted 
him from the charge vide impugned judgment dated 23.1.2007, 
vires whereof are being challenged by the State.  
 
 
It is argued that there was no occasion for the learned 
High Court to acquit the respondent in the face of overwhelming 
evidence, singularly pointed on respondent’s culpability when 
intercepted with huge quantity of contraband that cannot be 
conceivably foisted upon him. Forensic evidence confirming the 
narcotic character of the contraband his next argument is to seek 
reversal of the impugned judgment. 
 
 
Quantity of contraband notwithstanding, view taken 
by the learned High Court to acquit the respondent is neither 
artificial nor perverse inasmuch as discrepancy between the stated 
Criminal Appeal No.12-P/2013 
2
date of respondent’s arrest and his remission into police custody 
for registration of a criminal case sans any plausible explanation. 
Contradictions in the statements of Mir Badshah Khan, PW-3 and 
Sabz Ali, PW-4 in the above backdrop cannot be received as trivial 
and thus it is rightly held that the local police and FC personnel, 
being out of tune, the charge against the respondent is not free 
from doubt. Impugned view being a possible rendition warrants no 
interference. Appeal is dismissed. 
     
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
29th of April, 2019 
Ghulam Raza/* 
JUDGE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik 
Mr. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Criminal Appeal No.13-P/2014 
(On appeal from the judgment dated 
12.12.2013 of the Peshawar High Court, 
Peshawar passed in Cr. Appeal No.482-
P/2013) 
 
 
The State through Regional Director ANF 
Peshawar 
…Appellant(s) 
VERSUS 
Sohail Khan 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Appellant(s) 
: Mr. Muhammad Tariq Shah, 
Special Prosecutor, ANF 
 
 
 
For the Respondent(s) 
: N.R. 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 30.04.2019 
 
ORDER 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Sohail Khan, 
respondent herein, had been sent for through repeated process; 
instead of vindicating his position, he has opted to stay away, thus 
leaving the Court with no option to decide this appeal on merits 
with assistance of the learned Law Officer. On having been found 
in possession of 11.400 kilograms of Charas Garda, he was 
indicted before a Special Court (CNS) at Peshawar; convicted under 
Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 the 
learned trial Judge handed down sentence of five years with fine of 
rupees fifty thousand or to undergo six months S.I. in lieu thereof 
vide impugned judgment dated 21.1.2010. A learned division 
bench of the Peshawar High Court declined to enhance 
respondent’s sentence to imprisonment for life as mandated by 
law. The issue is being re-agitated through leave of the Court to 
examine whether a sentence lesser than imprisonment for life can 
be awarded to a convict with contraband exceeding ten kilograms 
in weight.  
Criminal Appeal No.13-P/2014 
 
2
2. 
 
The learned Law Officer contends that the proviso to 
Section 9(c) of the Act ibid mandatorily provides punishment of 
imprisonment for life and this left the learned High Court with no 
option but to enhance respondent’s sentence to imprisonment for 
life so as to rectify the error committed by the trial Court; it has 
also been pointed out that the respondent did not prefer appeal 
after the learned High Court maintained his conviction.  
3. 
 
The respondent by his own choice has found it 
convenient to stay away; his absence is seemingly calculated to 
avoid the process of law and certainly cannot stand in impediment 
to the disposal of this appeal; he has been found guilty of 
possessing contraband, in excess of ten kilograms; evidence of 
recovery and forensic report is inexorably pointed upon his 
culpability and thus in circumstances he was liable to be 
sentenced to imprisonment for life; magnanimity shown by the 
Courts below being outside the remit of law merits recall.  Appeal 
is allowed, impugned judgments to the extent of quantum of 
sentence are set aside. He is sentenced to Imprisonment for life 
however, the amount of fine is kept intact along side attending 
consequences. Non-bailable warrants of arrest shall issue to bring 
the respondent before the law so as to serve out sentence inflicted 
upon him.  
 
     
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
30th of April, 2019 
Ghulam Raza/* 
JUDGE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik 
Mr. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Criminal Appeal No.16-P/2013 
(against the judgment dated 17.6.2004 
passed 
by 
Peshawar 
High 
Court, 
Abbottabad Bench passed in Criminal 
Appeal No.198/2003). 
 
State thr. ANF Peshawar 
…Appellant(s) 
VERSUS 
Olufemi 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Appellant(s) 
: Mr.Muhammad Tariq Khan, ASC 
 
 
 
For the Respondent(s) 
: N.R. 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 29.04.2019 
 
Judgment 
Olufemi, a Nigerian national, respondent herein was 
surprised by contingent of Anti Narcotics Force, Haripur; he was 
found with 25 kilograms of heroine and sent to face trial before a 
learned 
Judge, 
Special 
Court 
(CNS), 
Peshawar, 
camp 
at 
Abbottabad; returned a guilty verdict; he was convicted under 
Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and 
sentenced to imprisonment for life along side to the tune of rupees 
one million or five year S.I. in default thereof with benefit under 
Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure the learned 
Peshawar High Court vide impugned judgment dated 17.6.2004, 
however proceeded to acquit him from the charge primarily on the 
ground that, contraband allegedly recovered was destroyed in 
violation of procedure provided under Section 516 A of the Code 
ibid, vires whereof are being disputed with considerable vehemence 
on the ground that destruction of the contraband under 
magisterial supervision ruled out possibility of any foul play and 
thus strict non-compliance with the suggested procedure would 
not vitiate respondent’s culpability, otherwise firmly established 
Criminal Appeal No.16-P/2013 
2
through massive evidence, it is concluded by the learned standing 
counsel.  
 
We would abstain to examine the vires of arguments 
raised before us in absence of the respondent, a Nigerian national, 
reported to have left Pakistan as in his absence the exercise would 
be merely an academic discussion without consequential impact; 
for yet another reason we find it inexpedient to interfere with the 
impugned judgment as in the event of reversal of the impugned 
view, a cumbersome procedure of respondent’s extradition would 
be a process far from convenient. Much water has flown under the 
bridge; the contraband has since been destroyed with respondent 
no longer within the Realm. Appeal is dismissed. 
     
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
29th of April, 2019 
Ghulam Raza/* 
JUDGE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik 
Mr. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Criminal Appeals No.17-P & 18-P/2013 
(against the judgment dated 24.7.2007 passed by 
the 
Peshawar 
High 
Court, 
Peshawar 
in 
Crl.As.599/2006). 
 
The State  
(in both cases) 
…Appellant(s) 
VERSUS 
Imran Nazir 
Muhammad Yousaf 
(Crl.A.17-P/2013) 
(Crl.A.18-P/2013) 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Appellant(s) 
: Mr.Muhammad Tariq Khan, ASC 
 
 
 
For the Respondent(s) 
: N.R 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 29.04.2019 
 
Judgment 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Arisen out of the 
same backdrop with a common thread, the captioned appeals are 
being decided through this single judgment.  Way back on 
30.6.2004, Anti Narcotics Force, Peshawar on a tip off intercepted 
a Punjab bound truck bearing registration No.PRC-6168. Upon 
search, 2800 kilograms of charas was recovered from secret 
cavities of the vehicle; the respondents were apprehended and sent 
to face trial before the learned Judge, Special Court (CNS), 
Peshawar; they were returned a guilty verdict under Section 9 (c) of 
the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997 and sentenced to 
imprisonment for life along side fine of Rs.500,000/- or to undergo 
five years S.I. in the event of default with benefit of Section 382-B 
of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The vehicle was forfeited in 
favour of the State. A learned division bench of the Peshawar High 
Court vide impugned judgment dated 24.7.2007 acquitted the 
respondents from the charge vires whereof are being challenged 
through leave of the Court on the ground that there was no 
occasion for the learned High Court to acquit the respondents 
Criminal Appeals No.17-P & 18-P/2013 
2
merely on the ground that the prosecution witnesses failed to point 
out as to who was on the wheel when ANF contingent surprised 
them.  
2. 
 
A huge quantity of contraband notwithstanding we 
have not been able to take exception to the view taken by the 
learned High Court inasmuch as in the presence of two individuals 
in 
the 
cabin 
it 
was 
incumbent 
upon 
the 
witnesses 
to 
unambiguously point out the person on the vehicle in order to 
establish conscious possession of the seized stuff and in the face of 
wavering positions taken by the prosecution itself, respondents 
cannot be denied the benefit of the doubt, a golden thread in our 
criminal jurisprudence. We do not feel inclined to interfere with the 
impugned judgment, however the forfeiture of vehicle impounded 
by the ANF is kept intact. Appeals are dismissed. 
     
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
29th of April, 2019 
Ghulam Raza/* 
JUDGE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik 
Mr. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Criminal Appeal No.19-P/2014 
(On appeal from the judgment dated 
14.12.2011 passed by the Peshawar 
High Court, Peshawar in Ehtesab 
Criminal Appeal No.15 of 2003). 
 
Abdullah Jan 
…Appellant(s) 
VERSUS 
The State & others 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Appellant(s) 
: Syed Zafar Abbas Zaidi, ASC 
Haji Muhammad Zahir Shah, AOR 
 
 
 
For The National 
Accountability Bureau 
: Syed Azeem Dad, Additional 
Deputy Prosecutor General, 
National Accountability Bureau 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 30.04.2019 
 
ORDER 
 
  
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Abdullah Jan, 
appellant herein, is in receipt of a guilty verdict returned by 
learned 
Judge, 
Accountability 
Court 
No.1, 
Peshawar 
vide 
impugned judgment dated 13.9.2013. As a Store Keeper in 
Communication & Works Department, he was found to have 
accumulated assets, hugely disproportionate to his legitimate 
source of income. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant questioned vires 
of his conviction before the Peshawar High Court; the attempt met 
with no better fate as the learned High Court concurred with the 
findings recorded by the learned trial Court vide judgment dated 
14.12.2011. 
2. 
 
We have noticed that the learned High Court while 
affirming findings rendered by the learned Accountability Court 
has not discussed evidence adduced by the prosecution as well as 
the appellant and thus we feel handicapped to objectively verify the 
points of determination as well as contentions raised by the 
appellant and therefore consider it in the fitness of things to remit 
Criminal Appeal No.19-P/2014 
 
2
this matter to the learned High Court so as to benefit us with 
detailed discussion within the contemplation of Section 367 of the 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. This appeal is allowed, the 
impugned judgment is set aside, the case is remanded and shall be 
deemed to be pending for decision afresh. It is expected that the 
learned High Court would find it convenient, in the fullness of 
time, sooner rather than later, to decide the issue, after affording 
opportunity of hearing to the appellant. 
     
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
30th of April, 2019 
Ghulam Raza/* 
JUDGE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik 
Mr. Justice Syed Mansoor Ali Shah 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Criminal Appeal No.22-P/2014 
(Against the judgment dated 8.6.2010 of the 
Peshawar High Court, Peshawar passed in Cr. 
Appeal No.88/2007) 
 
 
State through Director ANF 
…Appellant(s) 
VERSUS 
Parvez Khan & another 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Appellant(s) 
: Mr. Muhammad Tariq Shah, Special 
Prosecutor, Anti Narcotics Force 
 
 
 
For the Respondent(s) 
: N.R. 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 30.04.2019 
 
 
ORDER 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.-  In a Punjab bound, 
Mazda truck bearing registration No.KG-5783, Parvez Khan and 
Ismail Khan, respondents herein were surprised by an Anti 
Narcotics Force contingent within the remit of Police Station Dera 
Ismail Khan. Upon search a huge cache of contraband comprising 
opium and charas weighing 576 kilograms was recovered from 
secret cavities of the vehicle.  Indictment before a learned Judge 
Special Court (CNS), Peshawar, camp at Dera Ismail Khan, 
resulted into conviction under Section 9(c) of Control of Narcotic 
Substances Act, 1997; they were sentenced to imprisonment for 
life along with fine of rupees five lacs each or to undergo two years 
S.I. with benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal 
Procedure, 1898. Marwat Khan and Zaheer Shah, accomplice 
behind the consignment stayed away from law and stand 
proceeded accordingly. The vehicle was forfeited to the State. A 
learned division bench of Peshawar High Court acquitted the 
respondents from the charge on a variety of grounds, most 
prominent being a stated lack of conscious knowledge on part of 
Criminal Appeal No.22-P/2014 
 
2
the respondents as the vehicle in question was registered in the 
name of one Muhammad Afaq, a resident of Karachi, who 
disowned ownership. It was further noted by the learned High 
Court that case property including the vehicle itself was not 
properly exhibited.  
Leave to appeal has been granted to the extent of Parvez 
Khan, respondent. Learned Law Officer contends that there was no 
occasion for the learned High Court to acquit the respondent from 
the charge in the face of massive recovery of contraband that could 
not be conceivably foisted upon the respondent and as such his 
acquittal from the charge on inconsequential omissions warrants 
interference by this Court.  
2. 
 
Huge 
cache 
of 
different 
variety 
of 
contraband 
notwithstanding the prosecution does not appear to have aptly 
prosecuted its case; concomitantly lacunas noticed by the learned 
High Court cannot be viewed artificial or imaginary and hypothesis 
of respondent lack of conscious knowledge cannot be refuted 
without being imprudent. The appeal fails; Order of forfeiture of 
the vehicle in favour of the State is kept intact. Appeal dismissed.  
     
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
30th of April, 2019 
Ghulam Raza/* 
JUDGE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
Mr. Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan 
 
Criminal Appeal No.359 of 2018 
(Against the judgment dated 27.2.2018  of 
the Peshawar High Court Abbottabad Bench 
passed in Criminal Appeal No.86-A/2015) 
 
 
Muhammad Mumtaz 
   
 
…Appellant(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
Mehtab and another 
 …Respondent(s) 
 
For the Appellant(s): 
Qari Abdul Rasheed , ASC 
 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR 
 
For the Respondent (s) 
Mr. Naveed Hayat Malik, ASC 
 
For the State: 
Malik Akhtar Hussain Awan, AAG KPK 
 
Date of hearing: 
2.12.2019 
 
ORDER 
 
 
      Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Mehtab s/o Ayub, 
respondent herein, was tried as a juvenile for committing Qatl-i-
Amd of his schoolmate Muhammad Azhar in the dormitory during 
wee hours of 17.9.2013. The incident was reported without 
nomination; weapon of offence spotted outside the room, turned 
out as a lead to the respondent who was eventually tried on the 
basis of various pieces of circumstantial evidence, his retracted 
judicial confession being most prominent. A learned Additional 
Sessions Judge at Abbotabad returned a guilty verdict vide 
judgment dated 5.6.2015; convicted under clause (b) of Section 
302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, the respondent was 
sentenced to imprisonment for life with a direction to pay 
Rs.50,000/- as compensation or undergo six months SI in default 
thereof with pre-trial commutation. A learned Judge-in-Chamber 
of the Peshawar High Court altered respondent’s conviction into 
clause (c) of the Section ibid and reduced sentence to 10-years RI 
Cr.A. No.359-2018 
2
vide impugned judgment dated 27.2.2018; complainant seeks 
enhancement thereof, by leave of the Court.  
2. 
 
Learned counsel for the appellant while conceding that 
the respondent has since served out the sentence, nonetheless, 
contends that sentence of 10-years is not a conscionable wage for 
the crime and, thus, merits enhancement in the interest of 
justice, albeit without support from the State.  
3. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
4. 
 
Respondent’s confessional statement, though retracted 
subsequently, is prosecution’s mainstay; going by his words, he 
was carnally assaulted by the deceased for more than once; 
despite resistance, the deceased insistingly treaded the lusty 
course and it is in this backdrop, according to the prosecution 
itself, that the respondent exasperatingly embarrassed, took the 
most drastic step in the face of no other possible motive. In the 
absence of any other evidence, the respondent made his breast 
clean and as such his narrative is to be received in its totality. 
Incident though most unfortunate, nonetheless, the deceased 
cannot be credited as being entirely blameless and as such 
interference by this Court at this point of time, particularly when 
the respondent had already served out the sentence would be far 
from being expedient. Appeal fails. Dismissed.   
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad  
2nd  December, 2019 
Not approved for reporting 
 Azmat*
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Mr. Manzoor Ahmad Malik 
Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
 
Criminal Appeal No.518 of 2010 
(Against the order dated 26.01.2009 passed by 
the Islamabad High Court Islamabad in Criminal 
Original No.73 of 2008)  
 
 
Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan 
 
 
 
…Appellant(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
Nadeem H. Shaikh and others 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Appellant(s): 
Syed Hamid Ali Shah, ASC 
 
Mr. Tariq Aziz, AOR  
 
For Respondent Nos. 
5,6,9,14,16: 
Mr. Tanvir-ul-Islam, ASC 
 
For Respondent Nos.18 & 19 Mr. Naeem Bukhari, ASC 
 
For Respondent No.3 
Mr. Nayab Gardezi, ASC 
 
Date of hearing: 
27.10.2020. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
    Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Impugned herein is 
order dated 21.1.2009, passed in Criminal Original No.73 of 2008 
titled as  Security & Exchange Commission of Pakistan Vs. Nadeem H. 
Sheikh & 32 others by the then Islamabad High Court to draw up 
proceedings against two from amongst a large array of the respondents 
under section 282-K of the Companies Ordinance, 1984. Exoneration 
of majority of the respondents was assailed through leave of the Court 
granted vide order passed as far back as on 14.12.2010. It is in this 
backdrop that despite repeated directions and opportunities generously 
granted by the Court from time to time, the appellant persisted in its 
failure to provide the addresses of the respondents so as to bring the 
issue, in the fullness of time, to its logical end, sooner rather than 
later; last order being on 25.02.2020 that runs as follows: 
“Ibrar Saeed, Law Officer appearing on behalf 
of the appellant requests for four weeks’ time. 
Time as requested is granted, but with a 
Criminal Appeal No.518 of 2010 
 
2
caution that in case the appellant still fails to 
comply, the appeal shall stand dismissed. The 
notice stands discharged.” 
 
There is no improvement in the state of affairs even today; the learned 
counsel for the appellant, when confronted with the non-compliance, 
stated that he had furnished requisite information to the Advocate-on-
Record, however, the latter when summoned, took a different plea, 
diametrically inconsistent with the position taken by the former and 
instead persuaded the Court for substitute service, a request that 
cannot be acceded to without disregard to the order earlier passed by 
this Court.  
 
Law assists the vigilant even in causes most valid and justiciable. 
Similarly, fixation of cases before Benches entails public expense and 
time, that must not be incurred more than once in the absence of a 
reason most genuine and compelling. Delay caused by the appellant in 
doing the needful is exasperating. We do not feel persuaded to allow 
this long drawn inaptitude to further encumber pendency of the Court. 
Dismissed.  
  
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
27th October, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-