sharif2uys/supreme-court-of-pak-judgments huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN  
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
MR. JUSTICE MAQBOOL BAQAR 
MR. JUSTICE YAHYA AFRIDI 
MR. JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMAD 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.989 of 2021 
(Against the judgment dated 2.7.2021 passed by the 
Peshawar High Court Peshawar in Cr. Misc. (B.A.) 
No.422-M/2021) 
 
 
 
 
Ejaz Ahmad and another  
 
 
 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
                                        VERSUS 
 
 
The State and another  
 
  
 
 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mian Abdul Rauf, ASC 
 
 
For the Respondent(s): 
Mr. Shumail Aziz, Addl. A.G. KP with 
Ziarat, I.O. 
 
 
Date of Hearing: 
29.09.2021 
 
 
 
 
 
     O R D E R 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Mst. Tasleem Bibi is 
blamed by the complainant, no other than her father, to have married with 
Ejaz Ahmed, co-accused during the subsistence of her first marriage with 
one Noorullah; both of them are behind the bars, lastly denied bail by a 
learned Judge-in-Chamber of the Peshawar High Court, Mingora Bench 
Swat, vide impugned order dated 2.7.2021.  
 
 
Mian Abdul Rauf, ASC contends that Mst. Tasleem Bibi 
vehemently denies her alleged nuptial bond with Noorullah PW and had 
competently married with Ejaz Ahmed co-accused of her free will and volition 
by exercising discretion vesting in her both under the divine as well as 
municipal law; he further contends that the edifice of first marriage is resting 
upon an oral Nikah and in the absence of any judicial declaration jactitating 
the alleged marriage, it would be inexpedient to detain the couple, 
Crl. Petition No.989/2021 
 
particularly when it is serving no useful purpose. The learned Law Officer 
has contested the plea.  
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
Be that as it may, without touching upon the merits of the plea 
raised before us, having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of 
the case, we would prefer to direct that the trial be concluded within a period 
of three months; it shall be held in jail premises while enabling the accused 
to arrange their representation through a counsel of choice, in the event of 
incapacity to arrange a lawyer, the Presiding Officer shall provide them a 
counsel at State expense so as to positively conclude the trial within the 
stipulated time frame. Disposed of.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
ISLAMABAD 
29th September, 2021 
Ghulam Raza/* 
“Not approved for Reporting”
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
 
       (Original Jurisdiction) 
 
 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, CJ 
MR. JUSTICE GULZAR AHMED 
MR. JUSTICE SH. AZMAT SAEED 
 
HUMAN RIGHTS CASE NO.14392 OF 2013 
 
(Action on News Clipping published in the Daily 
Pakistan 
dated 
17.4.2013 
with 
regard 
to 
unprecedented load shedding in the country) 
 
 
On Court notice: 
 
 
For WAPDA:  
Syed Moazzam Ali Rizvi, ASC 
Mr. Shahzad Asif, AD (Legal) 
 
Date of hearing: 
26.04.2013. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
 
The learned counsel appeared on behalf of WAPDA and 
stated that at present the WAPDA is responsible for the generating of 
hydroelectricity, which is 32% of the total electricity and at present it is 
generating about 60% of its capacity for a variety of reasons, including 
the fact that Indus River System Authority, which manages water flow 
from the Dams, is not allowing sufficient flow of water for WAPDA to 
achieve its target. He is directed to put up a comprehensive note in this 
behalf. 
2. 
 
The WAPDA and all concerned Departments are also 
directed to put up a combined figures of generating of electricity from 
the hydroelectricity, GENCO, IPPs and RPPs, if any, for the last six 
months commencing  from 1.10.2012 to 31.3.2013 and subsequent 
thereto a separate report from 1st April, 2013 to-date. All these 
Companies are directed to achieve the maximum target of production 
of the electricity for the purpose of supply to all the categories of 
consumers so they may be facilitated during the Summer Season, which 
has already commenced.  
3. 
 
Notice to the PEPCO, NTDS and Indus River System 
Authority through their respective Chairman, be issued to file their 
replies along with the facts, figures and the reasons relating to the 
shortage of electricity in the country. 
4. 
 
The Court will welcome the voluntary opinion of any 
expert, on the subject, for generating electricity from all the available 
sources and its distribution.  
5. 
 
Adjourned to 2.5.2013.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    Chief Justice   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
26th April, 2013.  
 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
*M Safdar Mahmood*
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) 
 
 
PRESENT: MR. JUSTICE MIAN SAQIB NISAR, HCJ 
MR. JUSTICE UMAR ATA BANDIAL 
MR. JUSTICE SAJJAD ALI SHAH 
 
HUMAN RIGHTS CASE NO. 17842  OF 2018 
(in the matter regarding removing educational and 
commercial buildings etc. from cantonments areas 
in Pakistan) 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing:  
26.04.2018 
ORDER  
 
 
The Human Rights Cell of this Court has placed a note 
before the Court, which postulates that all the schools in the 
Cantonment areas across Pakistan are being directed to be shifted 
from the Cantonment areas within a period of 15 days. Although 
vide order dated 24.10.2017, passed by a two Member Bench of 
this Court in Civil Appeal No.800/2012, it has been directed that 
the exercise of removing educational and commercial buildings 
etc., from the concerned areas be made gradually, yet from the 
note put up before us, it seems that the said order has not been 
complied with in letter and spirit and thus, the educational career 
of a substantial number of students would be at stake if immediate 
action of removal of the said school is allowed.  
2. 
 
In the light of the above, we issue notice to all the 
Cantonment Boards in Pakistan to submit their replies about the 
question as to why action has been taken in such haste and what 
was the urgency therein. Till the next order to the contrary, the 
order of this Court dated 24.10.2017 is held in abeyance, meaning 
thereby that no school shall be vacated/transferred from the 
Cantonment areas till such order is passed by this Court. Relist.  
 
 
CHIEF JUSTICE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
ISLAMABAD. 
26th April, 2018. 
Mudassar/
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, HCJ 
MR. JUSTICE KHILJI ARIF HUSSAIN 
MR. JUSTICE SH. AZMAT SAEED 
 
H.R.C. NO. 3677-E OF 2014 
(Non-availability of machine readable passports 
in Pakistan Embassy in China) 
 
In Attendance: 
Mr. Shah Khawar, Addl. Attorney General 
 
Mr. Muhammad Safdar, PD(MRP), Immigration & 
Passport 
 
Ch. Salman, Manager, HR(I&P)  
 
Barrister Mudassar Shah Naqvi, Legal Advisor (I&P) 
 
 
Date of Hearing: 
 
17.02.2014 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Mr. Muhammad Safdar, Project Director (Machine Readable 
Passports), Immigration & Passport Department submits that the office is in 
receipt of the applications of 7500 overseas Pakistanis who are held up in 
China because of non-availability of Machine Readable Passports in Pakistan 
Embassy in China. He added that the machine was installed in February, 2013, 
however, it is not operational on account of non-appointment of the technical 
officer which is a grade-17 post. Adds on Court query that a reference was sent 
to Ministry of Interior in July, 2013; that 4/5 reminders were issued but the 
Ministry has not issued the requisite appointment order because the said 
Ministry has sent the reference to the Prime Minister Secretariat and on 
account of the general ban imposed, no further action could be taken.  
 
2. 
 
We are surprised and rather dismayed over the insensitive attitude 
of the passport department. However, before we pass any order, we are 
persuaded to direct Secretary Interior to appear in Court on 19.02.2014 and 
explain the factual position.  
 
CHIEF JUSTICE 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
Islamabad, the 
17th of February, 2014 
Khurram
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Review Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Umar Ata Bandial 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Jail Petition No.255 of 2017 
(Against judgment dated 23.01.2017 passed by the 
Lahore High Court Multan Bench Multan in 
Criminal Appeal No.706 of 2011 along with M.R. 
No.5 of 2011) 
 
Nasir Abbas alias Nasiri 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
The State 
 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. 
Muhammad 
Sharif 
Janjua, 
ASC/AOR 
 
 
 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Ahmed Raza Gillani 
 
Addl. Prosecutor General Punjab 
 
 
Date of hearing: 
27.04.2020. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Nasir Abbas alias 
Nasiri, tried alongside acquitted co-accused for homicide, was returned 
a guilty verdict by the trial Court vide judgment dated 30.04.2011, 
upheld, albeit with alteration of death penalty, vide impugned 
judgment dated 23.01.2017, vires whereof, are being assailed through 
Jail Petition No.255 of 2017, barred by 41 days, condoned in the 
interest of justice. It is alleged that on the fateful day i.e. 07.08.2008, 
within the precincts of Police Station Saray Sidhu District Khanewal, 
with a view to restrain him from deposing in a murder case, he 
repeatedly shot Muhammad Aslam, deceased, accompanied by 
companions that included his son Muhammad Aamir PW; co-accused 
were blamed for conspiracy as well as facilitation. 
 
Mr. Muhammad Sharif Janjua, ASC, at State expense, contends 
that there is inordinate delay between the occurrence and postmortem 
examination, suggesting the incident being an un-witnessed affair, 
details whereof, were discovered and deliberated subsequently; while 
highlighting the role assigned to the acquitted co-accused, he argued 
that though somewhat inconsequential, nonetheless, was indivisible 
inasmuch as two of them had allegedly clutched the deceased before he 
Jail Petition No.255 of 2017  
2
was repeatedly shot on the opposite sides of his body and, thus, 
prosecution’s failure qua the co-accused goes a long way to tremor the 
entire structure; he has further referred to massive improvements in 
graduation of number of accused as well as manner of occurrence to 
argue that it would be unsafe to maintain the conviction particularly in 
the backdrop of ongoing blood feuds inter se the parties. Leave to 
appeal is granted to appraise entire evidence to ensure safe 
administration of criminal justice.  
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
27th April, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Umar Ata Bandial 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
Jail Petition No.317 of 2018 
(Against judgment dated 12.03.2018 passed by the 
Lahore 
High 
Court 
Lahore 
in 
Crl. 
Appeal 
No.1285/2013 along with M.R. No.260/2013)  
 
 
Fateh Sher 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
The State  
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Sarfraz Khan Gondal, ASC 
 
 
 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Ahmed Raza Gillani 
 
Addl. Prosecutor General Punjab 
 
Date of hearing: 
29.04.2020. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- From amongst a large 
array of accused, prosecuted through a private complaint after 
complainant’s dissatisfaction with the investigative process, Fateh 
Sher, petitioner, alone was returned a guilty verdict in a case of 
homicide by a learned Additional Sessions Judge at Pindi Bhatian; 
convicted under clause (b) of section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 
1860 vide judgment dated 01.8.2013, he was sentenced to death, 
altered into imprisonment for life by the learned High Court vide 
impugned judgment dated 12.3.2018, vires whereof are being assailed 
on a variety of grounds, wholesale failure of prosecution case being 
most prominent.  
 
The incident is a night affair on fringe of the village Abadi when 
according to the complainant he accompanied the deceased and the 
injured at 10:45 p.m, without any apparent purpose. Besides the 
petitioner, his brothers Ikram Ullah and Ihsan Ullah, each lethally 
armed, alongside three unknown, confronted them with fire shots. Abid 
Hussain and Asghar Ali PWs were statedly attracted to the scene at 
Jail Petition No.317 of 2018 
2
that unearthly hour of the night to witness the occurrence, instigated 
by Javed co-accused. Through a supplementary statement purportedly 
recorded on 24.5.2010, unknown assailants were introduced by their 
names with specific roles. The co-accused were exonerated by the 
Investigating Officer and the complainant having found investigative 
conclusions inconsistent with the case set up in the crime report, 
preferred a private complaint which again resulted into failure barring 
the petitioner. Prosecution’s failure qua majority of the accused, one of 
whom is indivisibly assigned identical role, question of identity of the 
assailants in a moonlit night as mentioned in the crime report, an 
unanticipated encounter between the deceased and the injured with 
the assailants and inconsequential forensic report, makes out a case 
for reappraisal of evidence to ensure safe administration of criminal 
justice. Leave granted.   
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
29th April, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT:  
Mr. Justice Manzoor Ahmad Malik 
Mr. Justice Sardar Tariq Masood 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Jail Petition No.521 of 2017 
(Against the judgment dated 16.5.2017 
passed by the Lahore High Court, 
Rawalpindi Bench in Criminal Appeal 
No.799 of 2016). 
 
Muhammad Kamran 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
VERSUS 
 
The State   
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s) 
: Malik Altaf Hussain, ASC 
 
 
 
For the State 
: Mirza Abid Majeed, DPG 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 11.06.2019. 
 
 
JUDGMENT 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Surprised by a 
police contingent, the petitioner was found in possession of 
Charas Garda, weighing 1200-grams within the remit of Police 
Station Naseerabad Rawalpindi on 26-1-2016; upon conclusion 
of investigation, he was sent to face trial along with forensic 
report that confirmed the narcotic character of the substance; 
in the wake of a regular trial, he was returned a guilty verdict 
by a learned Additional Sessions Judge at Rawalpindi vide 
judgment dated 17-11-2016; convicted under Section 9 (c) of 
the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, he was 
sentenced to 4-years and 6-months RI along with fine of 
Rs.20,000/- or to suffer 2-months SI in default thereof with 
benefit of section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 
1898. Petitioner’s appeal in the High Court met with no better 
fate vide impugned judgment dated 16-5-2017 and this brings 
him to this Court.  
Jail Petition No.521 of 2017 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2 
 
2. 
 
Learned counsel for the petitioner despite being at 
his best has not been able to point out any serious flaw or 
infirmity that may be viewed as material or substantial in 
nature in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. An 
alleged discrepancy in the description of the contraband 
recovered, between the complaint and statements of the 
witnesses went unchallenged during the trial and as such the 
petitioner cannot claim any benefit thereof in the absence of 
confrontation within the contemplation of Article 140 of the 
Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984. No case for interference is 
made out. Petition stands dismissed.    
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
11th of June, 2019 
Azmat Ali/* 
JUDGE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Advisory Jurisdiction) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PRESENT: 
 
Mr. Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, CJ 
Mr. Justice Muhammad Sair Ali  
Mr. Justice Ghulam Rabbani 
 
 
REFERENCE NO. 1 OF 2011  
 
[REFERENCE BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE 
ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN UNDER 
ARTICLE 186 OF THE CONSTITUTION TO 
REVISIT THE CASE OF ZULFIQAR ALI 
BHUTTO REPORTED AS PLD 1979 SC 38] 
-.-.-  
 
 
On behalf of President: 
Dr. Babar Awan  
Minister for Law & Justice 
Government of Pakistan 
Mr. M. Masood Chishti  
Secretary, Ministry of Law & Justice  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Date of hearing:  
 
13.04.2011 
-.-.- 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Dr. Babar Awan has stated that he would appear in 
this matter. But we have told him that as a lawyer he must be 
aware that he has to get his licence revived, though we know 
that there are examples where during the era when there was no 
constitutional dispensation in the country, Ministers had been 
appearing before the Courts as lawyers, but now as there is 
constitutional dispensation and institutions are functioning under 
Reference 1 of 2011 
Order dt. 13.04.2011 
2 
the Constitution, therefore, such exercise should not be 
repeated. On this, he stated that he has prepared his resignation, 
which was placed before us for our perusal along with another 
document whereby he has been authorized by the President to 
appear in Court. However, resignation has to be tendered to the 
President, who is the competent authority to accept the same. 
We appreciate that realizing importance of the case, Dr. Babar 
Awan, Minister for Law has tendered his resignation and his 
licence is likely to be revived during the course of the day. In 
view of the importance of the Reference, we adjourn it to 
14.04.2011 at 11.30 a.m.    
 
 
 
 
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, CJ  
 
 
 
 
MUHAMMAD SAIR ALI, J  
 
 
 
GHULAM RABBANI, J   
 
 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
13th April, 2011
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE ANWAR ZAHEER JAMALI, HCJ 
MR. JUSTICE AMIR HANI MUSLIM 
MR. JUSTICE FAISAL ARAB 
 
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1022 OF 2012 
(On appeal against the judgment dated 1.7.2010 
passed by the High Court of Balochistan, Quetta in 
C.P. No. 209/2009) 
 
Hafeez ur Rehman 
… Appellant 
VERSUS 
Judge Accountability Court No. 2 and another 
…Respondents 
 
 
For the Appellant: 
Mr. Wasim Sajjad, Sr. ASC 
 
 
 
 
For the Respondents: 
Mr. Nasir Mehmood Mughal, Special 
Prosecutor, NAB 
 
For the Federation: 
Mr. Abdur Rasheed Awan, DAG 
 
Date of Hearing:  
06.06.2016 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
ANWAR ZAHEER JAMALI, CJ.- We have heard the 
arguments of the learned ASC for the appellant and the learned 
Special Prosecutor General, NAB. For the reasons to be recorded 
separately, this Civil Appeal is dismissed. 
 
 
 
CHIEF JUSTICE 
JUDGE 
JUDGE 
Islamabad, the 
6th of June, 2016 
Not Approved For Reporting 
Khurram
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, HCJ 
MR. JUSTICE KHILJI ARIF HUSSAIN 
MR. JUSTICE SH. AZMAT SAEED 
 
S.M.C. NO. 03 OF 2014 AND H.R.C. 17126-G/2013 & H.R. MISC. 27/2013, 
H.R.C. 17891-G/2013, H.R.M.A. 120/2013 IN H.R.C. 17126-G/2013 & 
CONSTITUTION PETITION 40/2013 & C.M.A. NO. 5369/2013 AND C.M. 
APPEAL NO. 37 OF 2014 IN CONSTITUTION PETITION NO. NIL OF 2014 
AND CONSTITUTION PETITION NO. 05 OF 2014 
 
 
 
S.No. Case No.  
 Parties name 
 
1. 
S.M.C. NO. 03/2014 
 Suo moto action upon an 
incident of indiscriminate 
firing and suicide attack in 
District Courts, Islamabad 
2. 
HRC 17126-G/2013 & H.R. 
MISC. NO. 27/2013 
 For arrest of the accused 
involved in cases of torture 
and 
murder 
of 
the 
Advocate 
 
3. 
 
HRC 17891-G/2013 
  
Regarding 
torture 
on 
lawyers in Rawalpindi 
 
4. 
 
H.R.M.A. 
120/2013 
IN 
H.R.C. 17126-G/2013 
  
News 
clipping 
of 
Daily 
Express 
Tribune 
dated 
4.5.2013 regarding arrest 
of the accused 
 
5. 
 
CONSTITUTION 
PETITION 
NO. 
40/2013 
& 
C.M.A. 
5369/2013 
 
(For 
security 
of 
lawyers 
community 
and 
the 
members of the judiciary) 
  
Pakistan Supreme Court 
Bar 
Association 
Vs. 
Federation of Pakistan 
 
6. 
 
C.M. APPEAL NO. 37/2014 
IN 
CONSTITUTION 
PETITION NO. NIL OF 2014 
 
(Misc appeal against the 
order of Registrar) 
  
M. 
Tariq 
Asad 
Vs. 
Federation of Pakistan and 
others 
 
7. 
 
CONSTITUTION 
PETITION 
NO. 05/2014 
  
Riaz 
Hanif 
Rahi 
vs. 
Federation of Pakistan and 
others 
 
 
In Attendance: 
Mr. Mohsin Akhtar Kiyani, President, IHCBA 
 
Mr. Mustafa Ramday, A.G. Punjab 
 
Mr. Zahid Yousaf, A.G. KPK 
 
Mr. Muhammad Farid Dogar, AAG Balochistan 
Ms. Shireen Imran, Gen Secretary, IHCBA 
Mr. Jawad Paul, Commissioner, Islamabad 
Mr. Jamil Hashmi, SP, CIA 
Mr. Azhar Hussain Shah, DSP/L, ICT 
Mr. Ghulam Mustafa, Inspector Legal, ICT 
Mr. Muhammad Riaz, S.I, P.S. Industrial Area 
Mr. Muhammad Imtiaz, S.I, P/s Civil Lines 
Mr. Allah Yar, Inspector/SHO, Sadiqabad, Rawalpindi 
Malik Arshad, SHO, Warish Khan, Rwp 
Mr. Sajid Ilyas Bhatti, DAG 
Mr. Dil Muhammad Khan Alizai, ASC 
 
 
Date of Hearing:  
07.04.2014 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
The inquiry report from the Islamabad High Court which was 
conducted by Mr. Justice Shoukat Aziz Siddiqui has been received. President of 
the High Court Bar Association seeks permission to examine that and make his 
submissions. He may inspect the report in the office but would not make it 
public during the pendency of these proceedings. To come up on 9.4.2014. 
 
 
 
 
CHIEF JUSTICE 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
Islamabad, the 
7th of April, 2014 
Not Approved For Reporting 
Khurram
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Original Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
 
 
Mr. Justice Umar Ata Bandial, CJ 
 
 
Mr. Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan 
Mr. Justice Sayyed Mazahar Ali Akbar Naqvi 
 
 
Mr. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail 
Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar  
 
 
SUO MOTO CASE NO.3 OF 2022 
(Re: Independent and Transparent Investigation into the 
Murder of Renowned Journalist, Mr. Arshad Sharif in 
Kenya).  
 
 
In attendance: 
 
 
Ch. Aamir Rehman, Addl. AGP 
Dr. Akbar Nasir, IG ICT 
Mr. Awais Ahmad, DIG 
Mian Shahbaz, IO 
Mr. Irfan, Director Law M/o Information  
Mr. Israr Ahmad Khan, Director Law FIA 
Mr. Waqas Rasool, Deputy Director Law 
Mr. M. Syrus Sajjad Qazi, Addl. Secretary M/o Foreign Affairs 
Mr. Murad Wazir, DG M/o Foreign Affairs 
Mr. Asad Khan Burki, LA M/o Foreign Affairs 
Syed Faraz Raza, ALA M/o Foreign Affairs 
 
  
Date of Hearing:             05.01.2023 
  
 
ORDER 
 
The learned Addl. Attorney General has referred to 
the report filed by the Special Joint Investigation Team (“SJIT”) 
on 04.01.2023 which recounts the progress made so far in its 
investigative work since constitution of the SJIT on 07.12.2022. 
He has informed us that the Federal Government has provided 
requisite funds for investigative work to be done by the SJIT in 
two foreign countries, namely, UAE and Kenya. Requests for 
Mutual Legal Assistance (“MLA”) to the government in these 
countries were issued by the Federal Government on 04.01.2023. 
In this behalf he acknowledges that the Foreign Office is 
cooperating fully to secure the requisite help and collaboration of 
 SMC 3 OF 2022 
2
the concerned police/investigative authorities in both foreign 
States for the SJIT. As soon as the MLA requests are responded 
favourably by the two foreign governments, the SJIT shall be 
visiting the said States for commencing their investigation 
abroad. 
 
2. 
 
We note that the SJIT has performed some 
investigative work within Pakistan. 41 witnesses are reported to 
have been examined by it so far. The real issues of the cause and 
perpetrators of the assassination of Mr. Arshad Sharif would be 
unravelled after the relevant evidence available abroad in the 
afore-noted two countries is collected. We expect that the SJIT is 
fully prepared with its priorities, scenarios and areas of inquiry in 
the investigation and the persons and material that would be 
relevant and useful solving the crimes committed. The learned 
Addl. Attorney General submits that a month’s time may be given 
for the next report of the SJIT. Relist in the first week of 
February, 2023.   
       
   
CHIEF JUSTICE 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
 
Islamabad 
05.01.2023 
Rashid+Naseer  
JUDGE