sharif2uys/supreme-court-of-pak-judgments huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik 
Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
 
Criminal Appeal No.630 of 2019 
(Against the judgment dated 11.09.2018 passed 
by the High Court of Sindh, Bench at Sukkur in 
Crl. Jail Appeal No.D-175 of 2017)  
 
 
 
Gulzar 
 
 
…Appellant(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
 
 
 
  
The State  
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Appellant(s): 
Mr. M. Sharif Janjua, ASC 
 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Hussain Bux, 
 
Addl. Prosecutor General Sindh 
 
Date of hearing: 
28.10.2020. 
 
JUDGMENT 
 
 
 
    Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- The appellant was 
surprised with a considerable cache of cannabis by a contingent of 
Khanpur Mahar Ghotki police on 27.3.2017; a Special Judge (CNA) 
Ghotki vide judgment dated 20.10.2017 returned him a guilty verdict; 
convicted under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 
1997, he was sentenced to 10 ½ years rigorous imprisonment with a 
direction to pay fine in the sum of Rs.50,000/- or to undergo simple 
imprisonment for a period of 8 months in lieu thereof, pre-trial period 
inclusive, upheld by a learned Division Bench of the High Court of 
Sindh vide impugned judgment dated 11.9.2018, assailed by the 
convict through a jail petition.  
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
Significant 
quantity 
of 
contraband 
notwithstanding, 
nonetheless, we have noticed prosecution’s failure to establish safe 
transmission to the office of Chemical Examiner; the failure has its 
consequences inasmuch as narcotic character of the contraband, 
recovery whereof is denied by the appellant throughout, was not 
established as Rahib Din (PW-2), examined under Public Prosecutor’s 
Criminal Appeal No.630 of 2019 
 
2
shadow, did not utter a single word to prove transmission of the entire 
cache, purportedly transmitted by him to the office of Chemical 
Examiner, in absence whereof, the appellant cannot be saddled with 
the culpability of possession without being conjectural, an option 
hardly available under the law. Criminal Appeal No.630 of 2019 is 
allowed; impugned judgment is set aside; the appellant is acquitted of 
the charge; he has already been ordered to be released, unless 
otherwise required to be detained, vide short order of even date. 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
28th October, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-
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.7-P of 2013 
(Against the judgment dated 31.01.2007 
passed by the Peshawar High Court, 
Peshawar in Criminal Appeal No.530 of 
2005). 
 
State thr. Advocate General, KP 
…Appellant(s) 
VERSUS 
Muhammad Rafiq & others 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Appellant(s) 
: Syed Qaisar Ali Shah,  
Additional Advocate General, 
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 
 
 
 
For the Respondent(s) 
: N.R. 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 29.04.2019 
 
Judgment 
  
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Through leave of 
the Court, respondents’ acquittal from the charge of homicide by a 
learned division bench of the Peshawar High Court vide impugned 
judgment dated 31.1.2007 has been called into question; they were 
returned a guilty verdict by a learned Additional Sessions Judge, at 
Swabi for committing qatl-e-amd of Tariq Ahmed and Muhammad 
Rafiq on 11.10.1990 within the precincts of Police Station Swabi 
while they were being sent off by their mother Mst. Poshan, PW, on 
their way to Islamabad; convicted on two counts of homicide they 
were sentenced to imprisonment for life on each, to run 
concurrently with benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal 
Procedure, 1898. 
2. 
 
Learned counsel for the appellant contends that there 
was no occasion for the learned High Court to acquit the 
respondents from the charge inasmuch as prosecution successfully 
proved its case beyond a shadow of doubt on the strength of 
confidence inspiring evidence leaving no space to entertain any 
Criminal Appeal No.7-P of 2013 
2
hypothesis other than their guilt. It is next argued that presence of 
Mst. Poshan, PW with her sons at the time of their departure for 
Islamabad cannot be viewed with suspicion; on the contrary her 
last detour with the deceased sons is most confidence inspiring 
and she certainly is not expected to swap the real offenders 
through substitution. The impugned acquittal has resulted into 
miscarriage of justice warranting interference by this Court, 
concludes the learned counsel. 
2. 
 
Magnitude of calamity and concomitant trauma for the 
family, notwithstanding what weighed with the learned High Court 
nonetheless is improbability of complainant’s presence at the crime 
scene during the fateful hours. Emotional attachments apart it is 
rather unusual for a woman more so in a pashtoon rural 
neighborhood to accompany her sons at a public thorough fare 
who 
had 
already 
spent 
preceding 
day 
in 
her 
company. 
Prosecution’s dilemma has been further compounded by deviation 
of Inzar Gul from his previous statement; conflict between ocular 
account and medical evidence noticed by learned High Court is not 
unrealistic. Once presence of Mst. Poshan, PW is found suspect, 
the testimony of Inzar Gul is also cast away. In this backdrop, 
impugned acquittal is premised on a prudently possible view which 
cannot be reversed merely on contra contemplation.  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.7-P/2014 
(On appeal form the Judgment dated 
28.05.2013 passed by the Peshawar 
High Court, Peshawar in Criminal 
Appeal No.558 of 2010). 
 
State through Director ANF Peshawar 
…Appellant(s) 
VERSUS 
Fakhar Zaman 
…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.-  Fakhar Zaman, 
respondent herein, was intercepted by Anti Narcotics Force, 
Peshawar on 5.4.2009 with 82.600 kilograms of charas garda as 
well as 07 kilograms of charas pukhta; he was convicted under 
Section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotics Substances Act, 1997 vide 
judgment dated 17.5.2010 and sentenced to imprisonment for life 
along with fine of rupees fifty thousands or to undergo six months 
S.I. in lieu thereof. The learned Peshawar High Court, in appeal, 
vide impugned judgment dated 28.5.2013 upheld the conviction, 
however reduced the sentence to ten years R.I. with benefit of 
Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 vires 
whereof are being challenged through leave of the Court, inter alia, 
on the ground that there was no occasion for the learned High 
Court to reduce the sentence from imprisonment for life to ten 
years as according to the proviso to Section 9(c) of the Act ibid, 
lowest mandated sentence for possessing contraband in excess of 
ten kilograms is imprisonment for life and as the learned High 
Court maintained respondent’s conviction, it had no option but to 
maintain the quantum of sentence as well. 
Criminal Appeal No.7-P/2014 
 
 
2
2
2. 
 
The respondent was sent for through repeated process 
and he has found it convenient to stay away from the law; his 
absence is seemingly calculated to avoid the judicial process. It is 
by now well settled that an appellant or a respondent, though 
endowed with right of opportunity of hearing, nonetheless, cannot 
hold the process of law in abeyance to a point of time of his own 
choice and his case can be decided even in his absence if the 
default is deliberate; a case in hand.  
3. 
 
The impugned view would not commend well with the 
law, 
unambiguously 
providing 
a 
sentence, 
not 
less 
than 
imprisonment for life as well as fine in case an offender is held 
guilty of possessing contraband in excess of ten kilograms as is the 
case with the respondent and therefore impugned view taken by 
the High Court is open to exception, warranting interference by 
this Court; consequently this appeal is allowed, impugned 
judgment dated 28.5.2013 is set aside and the sentence awarded 
by the learned trial Court is restored, however with benefit of 
Section 382-B of the Code ibid. Perpetual warrants of arrest shall 
issue to arrest the respondent so as to serve out the sentence, 
handed down by the learned High Court. 
 
     
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
30th of April, 2019 
Ghulam Raza/* 
JUDGE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN  
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE EJAZ AFZAL KHAN 
MR. JUSTICE DOST MUHAMMAD KHAN  
MR. JUSTICE IJAZ UL AHSAN 
 
Criminal Appeal No.97/2017  
(On appeal from the judgment dated 8.10.2013 passed by 
the 
Lahore 
High 
Court, 
Lahore 
in 
Crl.Appeal 
No.1141/2007 and M.R. No.444/07) 
 
 
Faisal  
…Appellant  
Versus  
The State 
..Respondent  
 
For the appellant: 
 
Mr. Ansar Nawaz Mirza, ASC  
 
For the State:  
 
Ch. M. Sarwar Sidhu, Addl. P.G. Pb. 
 
Date of hearing: 
 
5.12.2017 
 
 
 
 
  
ORDER  
 
  
For the reasons to be recorded later, we partly allow this 
appeal, convert the sentence of life imprisonment of the appellant to the 
one already undergone, leaving intact the amount of compensation to be 
paid to the legal heirs of the deceased or in default to undergo six 
months S.I. 
 
 
Judge  
 
 
 
Judge  
 
 
 
Judge  
Islamabad, the   
5th December, 2017 
Nisar /-‘
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmed Malik 
Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Cr. Misc. Application No.1404 of 2019  
in  
Cr. Review NIL of 2019 
In  
Cr. Appeal No.23 of 2006 
(Permission to file and argue the review petition) 
 
Raja Farhat Iqbal 
 
 
…Applicant 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
The State 
…Respondent 
 
For the Applicant: 
In person 
 
(assisted by Mr. Ghulam Sajjad 
Gopang, ASC, with permission of 
the Court) 
 
  
For the State: 
N.R. 
  
 
 
Date of hearing: 
15.10.2019. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
          Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J. Raja Farhat 
Iqbal, applicant herein, accused in a case of homicide, was 
acquitted by the trial Court; High Court of Sindh, however, 
reversed the findings and while returning a guilty verdict, 
sentenced him to imprisonment for life, vide judgment dated 
28.12.2005, vires whereof were challenged through an appeal; the 
complainant dissatisfied with the quantum of sentence came up 
with a petition for enhancement of sentence, however, without 
success. It was on 25-3-2009 when applicant’s learned counsel 
opted to withdraw the appeal, consequently dismissed; his 
subsequent attempt to seek a review of dismissal of his appeal 
failed on 12.3.2019; his failures, notwithstanding, he was released 
on parole way back on 24.1.2015 and it was one of the reasons 
that weighed with the Court to decline the review. The applicant 
has approached in person once again and was joined by  
Mr. Ghulam Sajjad Gopang, ASC during the proceedings; they are 
aggrieved by the office refusal to entertain their application on the 
Cr. M.A. No.1404 of 2019 
2
ground that after dismissal of earlier review petition, there was no 
occasion to entertain the request and it is in this backdrop that the 
present application (Cr.M.A. No.1404 of 2019) has been posted 
before us.  
2. 
 
Dismissal of review petition foreclosed avenues for 
subsequent attempts by the applicant and for that law is well 
settled by now. The applicant cannot escape the consequences of 
course adopted by his duly engaged counsel merely on the ground 
that he had not so instructed him, that too so late in the day. 
Being 
hopelessly 
misconceived, 
the 
instant 
application 
is 
dismissed.   
 
     
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
 
Islamabad, the  
15th October, 2019 
Azmat/-
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Original Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
MR. JUSTICE UMAR ATA BANDIAL 
MR. JUSTICE IJAZ UL AHSAN 
MR. JUSTICE MUNIB AKHTAR 
MR. JUSTICE SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI 
 
CRIMINAL ORIGINAL PETITION NO. 21 OF 2021 
(Contempt proceedings initiated against Masood-ur-Rehman 
Abbasi on account of derogatory and contemptuous language)   
 
 
 
 
In attendance  
: 
Mr. Sohail Mehmood, Addl. Attorney 
General for Pakistan. 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 
22.06.2021 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
It has come to our notice that a speech has been 
delivered by Masood-ur-Rehman Abbasi, General Secretary, PPP,  
PS-114, Karachi in which he has made indecent and disrespectful 
remarks about the Hon’ble Chief Justice of Pakistan that, on the 
face of it, appear to be derogatory and scandalous. Prima facie, we 
consider such blatant remarks made by him to constitute contempt 
of Court under the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 
and the law. Accordingly, let a show cause notice be issued to him 
under Article 204 of the Constitution read with Section 3 of the 
Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003 to file his reply and show cause 
why he may not be proceeded against and punished in accordance 
with law.  
2. 
 
The Inspector General of Police, Sindh is directed to 
ensure service of such notice upon the said Masood ur Rehman 
Abbasi and to make certain his appearance before this Court on the 
next date of hearing. Notice shall also be issued to PEMRA and FIA 
CRL.O.P.21/2021 
-:2:-
to furnish all the relevant record, data and information in respect of 
the said speech made by Masood ur Rehman Abbasi.  
3. 
 
Notice be also issued to the learned Attorney General for 
Pakistan in terms of Order XXVII-A CPC to assist the Court on the 
next date of hearing.  
4. 
 
Relist on 28.06.2021. 
 
Judge 
 
Judge 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
Islamabad, 
22.06.2021 
Naveed Ahmad +  
Irshad Hussain/*
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Sajjad Ali Shah 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.101-K of 2021 
(Against the judgment dated 16.06.2021 passed by the High Court of Sindh, 
Circuit Court, Hyderabad in Cr. A. No.D-250 of 2011 with Confirmation Case 
No.D-14 of 2011) 
 
 
Mushtaque Hussain  
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
The State through Prosecutor General Sindh 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Wali Muhammad, ASC 
 
Mr. Ghulam Rasool Mangi, AOR 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Hussain Bux Baloch,  
 
Addl. Prosecutor General, Sindh 
 
Date of hearing: 
07.09.2021. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
 Qazi 
Muhammad 
Amin 
Ahmed, 
J.- 
Petitioner 
is 
complainant in a case of homicide, reported vide FIR No.26 dated 
29.5.1997 at Police Station Bhitainagar District Hyderabad; it was 
alleged that on the fateful day, Abdul Rahim accused shot dead  
Dr. Tanvir  Hafeez, no other than his sister-in-law, in the backdrop of 
some domestic dispute; sent to trial, the accused was returned a guilty 
verdict; convicted under clause (b) of section 302 of the Pakistan Penal 
Code, 1860, he was sentenced to death by the learned Sessions Judge 
Hyderabad vide judgment dated 15.8.2011, altered into imprisonment 
for life by a Division Bench of the High Court of Sindh vide impugned 
judgment dated 16.6.2021, being assailed on the grounds that given the 
brutality inflicted upon the deceased, awfully reflected by as many as 
eight entry wounds with corresponding exits, there was no occasion for 
the High Court to alter penalty of death into imprisonment for life. The 
bottom line is that the wage settled by the learned trial Judge being 
most conscionable in circumstances did not warrant reduction and, 
thus, interference by this Court is most called for.  
2. 
 
Heard. 
Criminal Petition No. 101-K of 2021 
2
3. 
 
Be that as it may, the respondent who has not even been 
arrayed as a party in this petition, as per report submitted by the 
Superintendent Jail, has since been released on 1.7.2021 after serving 
out his sentence, reckoned in prison role as 16-years 5-months 1-day, 
remissions inclusive; it appears that after dismissal of his appeal albeit 
with reduction in sentence, he had contently retired to his fate. 
Imprisonment for life is a legal sentence and has already been served 
out by the petitioner and, thus, enormity of his crime notwithstanding, 
he cannot be recalled so as to be dispatched to the gallows for the 
offence he has endured imprisonment for life; there being one life, he 
cannot be vexed twice. Petition fails. Leave declined.  
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Karachi, the 
7th September, 2021 
Azmat/-
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 Petition No.1121/2017 
(Against judgment dated 21.9.2017 of the Lahore 
High Court, Multan Bench passed in Cr. A. 
No.482/2014) 
 
Muhammad Boota 
   
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
The State and another 
 …Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Shahid Azeem, ASC 
 
For the State: 
Mirza 
Abid 
Majeed, 
Deputy 
Prosecutor 
General Punjab 
 
Date of hearing: 
2.12.2019 
 
ORDER 
 
 
      Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Muhammad Boota, 
petitioner herein, was tried alongside Rashid Ali, acquitted co-accused, 
by a learned Addl. Sessions Judge at Multan; surprised by a police 
contingent, they were intercepted while transporting 15 sacks of Bhang, 
weighing 5 mound, on 11.6.2013 within the precincts of Police Station 
Baha-ud-Din Zakariya Multan; convicted under section 9 (c) of the 
Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, both were sentenced to 
imprisonment for life alongwith fine of Rs.25,000/- or to undergo 
simple imprisonment for one year in default thereof. A learned Division 
Bench of Lahore High Court at Multan acquitted Rashid Ali convict 
from the charge while maintaining petitioner’s conviction and sentence 
vide impugned judgment dated 21.9.2017, vires whereof are being 
assailed on a variety of grounds, absence of analysis protocol in the 
forensic report being most prominent.  
2. 
 
It has since been authoritatively settled by this Court in the 
case reported as The State through Regional Director ANF Vs. Imam 
Bakhsh (2018 SCMR 2039) that confirmatory forensic conclusions to 
establish narcotic character of a substance must be supported by 
protocol/procedure mandated by Rule 6 of the Control of Narcotic  
Substances (Government Analysts) Rules 2001 and non-compliance of 
Rule ibid would render the report of the Government Analyst 
Cr.P. No.1121 of 2017 
2
inconclusive, suspicious and untrustworthy and will not meet the 
evidentiary assumption attached to a report of the Government Analyst. 
Confronted with the shortcoming of the anomalous report, the learned 
Law Officer, nonetheless, still defended the impugned judgment, 
however, without mark. Prosecution has failed to prove its case against 
the petitioner to the hilt and it would be unsafe to maintain the 
conviction. Criminal petition is converted into appeal and allowed, 
impugned judgment is set aside, the petitioner/appellant shall be 
released forthwith, if not required in any other case.  
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad  
2nd  December, 2019 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat*
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Umar Ata Bandial 
Mr. Justice Faisal Arab 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.1145-L of 2019 
(Against the order dated 11.9.2019 passed 
by the Lahore High Court Lahore in  
Crl. Misc. No.49695-B of 2019) 
 
 
Saima Ashiq Javed 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
 
The State through Attorney General of Pakistan, 
Lahore & another   
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Zafar Mehmood Chaudhry, ASC 
 
along with Saima Ashiq Javed, petitioner  
 
 
 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Khurram Saeed, 
 
Additional Attorney General for Pakistan 
 
For Respondent No.2: 
N.R. 
 
Date of hearing: 
02.06.2020. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Muhammad Awais 
Rashid and Muhammad Adeel, Junior Auditors in the Accountant 
General Office Punjab, were the principal architects behind a financial 
scam that cost public exchequer Rs.57.6 million, misappropriated 
through bogus pensionary payments to the fake claimants; as the 
Federal  Investigation Agency probed the heist, the petitioner was 
found to have provided space to the embezzled amounts in her bank 
account that reflected various transactions comprising deposit by one 
of the accused as well as withdrawals thereof; attempt to secure bail in 
anticipation to her arrest failed before the trial Judge on 17.4.2018 
whereafter she applied for judicial protection in the High Court in the 
year 2019, on issuance of proclamation of absconsion; failure brings 
Criminal Petition No.1145-L of 2019 
2
her to this Court. Mr. Zafar Mahmood Chaudhry, learned ASC, while 
disputing the accusation, craftily pressed into service petitioner’s 
gender to argue that her remission into custody would perennially 
embarrass not only the petitioner but the family as well, an avoidable 
option inasmuch as no investigative benefit would accrue to the 
prosecution at the given stage of the case. Learned Additional Attorney 
General for Pakistan has contested the plea; according to him, the 
prosecution still expects disclosures from the petitioner, likely to be 
helpful to drive home the charge.  
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
It would be less than expedient to comment upon the 
arguments assailing evidence, comprising documented transactions 
involving bank accounts including one operated by the petitioner; her 
denials/explanations is a business to be best attended by the trial 
Court. Despite a generous opportunity, learned counsel has not been 
able to point out any mala fide lurking behind the intended arrest. Law 
does not confer immunity on the petitioner on account of her gender 
and as such she is required to make out a case for judicial protection; 
a prima facie nexus compounded by a conduct far from being enviable. 
Petition fails. Leave declined.    
 
   
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
2nd June, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-