sharif2uys/supreme-court-of-pak-judgments huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Maqbool Baqar 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Criminal Petition No.460 OF 2021 
(Against 
the 
order 
dated 
23.02.2021 
passed 
by 
the 
Lahore 
High 
Court 
Rawalpindi Bench in Crl. Misc. No.246-
B/2021) 
 
Noor Khan 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
The State 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Ms. Hifza Ibrar Bukhari, ASC 
 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR 
 
For the State: 
N.R. 
 
Date of hearing: 
24.05.2021. 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- The petitioner was 
surprised by a police contingent on 05.12.2020 within the precincts of 
Police Station Civil Lines, Rawalpindi with 1320 grams of cannabis, 
concealed in a shopping bag; he was declined bail throughout, lastly by 
a learned Judge-in-Chamber of Lahore High Court Rawalpindi Bench 
vide impugned order dated 23.02.2021; he seeks leave to appeal 
therefrom. 
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
Red-handed with seizure of considerable quantity of the 
contraband squarely brings petitioner’s case within the remit of 
‘Prohibition, contemplated by section 51 of the Control of Narcotic 
Substances Act, 1997; his claim of false implication is an issue that 
cannot be attended without going beyond the barriers of tentative 
assessment, an exercise prohibited by law. On our own analysis of the 
record, view concurrently taken by the courts below is not open to any 
legitimate exception. Petition fails. Leave declined.    
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
24th May, 2021 
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.464 of 2020 
(Against 
impugned 
judgment 
dated 
23.4.2020 passed by Peshawar High Court 
Peshawar in Cr.M.(BA) No.843-P/2020) 
 
 
Muhammad Hayat 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
 
The State & another   
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Mazullah Barkandi, ASC 
 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR 
 
 
 
 
For the State: 
Ms. Aysha Tasneem, ASC 
 
along with Raza Raban SI, Peshawar 
 
For the Complainant: 
Mr. Hasnain Ali, ASC 
 
 
Date of hearing: 
05.06.2020. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Aurangezb along with 
his nephew Intikhab Alam was asleep on 5.2.2020 in his Hujjra 
situated within the precincts of Police Station Mithra, Peshawar, when 
at 10:00 p.m. they were surprised by armed intruders; they ostensibly 
demanded to search the premises so as to apprehend the hiding 
Talbans and seize their arms; they subdued the inmates including the 
children after tying them  in different rooms and left the scene with the 
valuables comprising cash, gold ornaments and a vehicle. The 
complainant extricated himself and lodged report with the police at 
10:00 a.m. As the investigation progressed, the petitioner was arrested 
alongside co-accused; he was identified by the witnesses in a test 
identification parade; pursuant to disclosure, he led to the recovery of 
some of the robbed articles.  
 
Criminal Petition No.464 of 2020 
2
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
Alleged discrepancy in the actual number of assailants, 
stressed at inordinate length is an issue that cannot be settled within 
the restricted scope of tentative assessment of the material collected by 
the investigating agency. Similarly, flaws attributed to the test 
identification parade cannot be attended without undertaking a 
journey into prohibited territory. These are the issues, essentially to be 
determined by the trial Court, on the strength of evidence, yet to be 
recorded. In the absence of any apparent motive, suggestive of malice, 
identification of the accused coupled with recovery of the looted articles 
from within the safety of a dwelling at an odd hour of night to the 
horrors of the inmates that included children and women, we do not 
feel persuaded in our discretion to allow the request. Petition fails. 
Leave declined.   
 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
5th June, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
Present:  
MR. JUSTICE MAZHAR ALAM KHAN MIANKHEL  
MR. JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.48-P/2015 
(Against the judgment dated 19.02.2015 passed by the 
Peshawar High Court Mingora Bench (Dar-ul-Qaza) Swat in 
Crl. Appeal No.182/2014) 
 
Muhammad Daud and others 
 
 
…Petitioners  
Versus 
Syed Abid Ali and another 
..Respondents  
     
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Naveed Akhtar, ASC   
 
For the Respondent(s): Mr. Muhammad Inaam Yousfzai,  
 
 
 
 
Addl. A.G. K.P. 
 
Date of hearing: 
 
12.7.2021 
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER  
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J-. A shoot out within the 
precincts of Jehanzaib College Saidu Sharif Swat resulted into multiple 
casualties, each youthful; Muhammad Fawad (PW-6), Zafar Ali (PW-9) 
survived the life of fire, however, Muhammad Musa and Hashim Khan 
succumbed to their wounds. The petitioner along with Nasir, since 
proclaimed offender, was arrayed as the culprits in the crime report lodged 
by Muhammad Daud Khan (PW-18); during the trial, he was joined by other 
witnesses. Prosecution failed at the first tier as a learned Additional 
Sessions Judge acquitted the respondent from the charge vide judgment 
dated 14.6.2014; appeal against acquittal met with no better fate vide 
impugned judgment dated 19.2.2015, vires whereof, are being assailed on 
the ground that both the courts, in concurrence, ran into grievous error by 
relying upon reticent deposition by the injured witnesses, notwithstanding, 
that other eye witnesses present at the spot categorically named the 
respondent as well as the proclaimed offender, both spearheading the 
assault in a unison inside an educational premises. Forensic report 
confirming use of two different weapons with three empties wedding one 
weapon left at the spot, was a circumstance that heavily reflected upon 
respondent’s culpability, next argued the learned counsel.  
 
2
2. 
 
We have examined the record to find that though both the 
injured witnesses categorically confirmed receipt of fire shot injuries at the 
stated venue and point of time in the backdrop, suggested in the crime 
report, however, given their positions in the opposite direction in the 
crowded canteen, they had not visually seen the respondents, taking on the 
deceased, a shortcoming seemingly made up by other witnesses present at 
the spot. In the totality of circumstances and having regard to the 
absconsion of one of the assailants, we consider it expedient to grant leave 
so as to reappraise entire evidence with a view to secure the ends of justice. 
Send for Abid Ali through bailable warrants in the sum of Rs.200,000/- 
with one surety in the like, returnable to the Assistant Registrar of this 
Court, executable through Station House Officer concerned, within a 
fortnight.  
 
 
Judge  
 
 
 
Judge  
Peshawar,  
12th July, 2021 
Azmat/- 
‘Not approved for reporting’
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.500 of 2020  
(Against order dated 15.4.2020 passed by 
the Peshawar High Court Bannu Bench in 
Crl. Misc. No.BA No.142-B/2020) 
 
 
Kamran Ullah 
 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
The State & another  
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Talat Mehmood Zaidi, ASC 
 
Mr. Muhammad Sharif Janjua, AOR 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Anis M. Shahzad, ASC 
 
with Umar Nawaz, ASI 
 
For the Complainant: 
Mr. Dil M. Khan Alizai, ASC 
 
 
Date of hearing: 
06.07.2020. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Aftab Alam, 35/36, 
left home at about 7:00 p.m.; his wife, as stated by him, expected her to 
return shortly thereafter, however, upon failure to return, became 
suspicious and informed her brother-in-law at 2:00 a.m.; his mobile 
handset did not respond multiple attempts. Search started in the 
morning to find the dead body lying in a pool of blood in a field; he was 
done to death by unknown assailant(s) with fire shots; stricken by 
shock, the family was clueless about the motive behind the crime.  
As investigation progressed, the petitioner was taken on board as a 
suspect on the basis of complainant’s supplementary statement dated 
26.2.2020 wherein Sajid Ali Shah was also arrayed as an accomplice 
for the murder in the backdrop of a monetary dispute; the latter 
pursuant to a disclosure, led to the recovery of a .30 caliber pistol, 
a weapon that did not forensically tally with the casings secured during 
 Criminal Petition No.500 of 2020   
2
spot inspection. Semi burnt cell phone handsets used by the deceased, 
concealed underneath the soil, were recovered at petitioner’s instance 
vide inventory dated 25.2.2020.  
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
Be that as it may, complainant’s strong belief about 
petitioner’s culpability notwithstanding, evidentiary value of various 
pieces of prosecution evidence hitherto collected has to survive judicial 
scrutiny to cross the barriers of rules of evidence; the exercise has 
admittedly not yet commenced. Prosecution for the present is not 
possessed with any digital proof to establish subscriptive nexus 
between the deceased and the handsets. Call Detail Record (C.D.R.) 
purportedly suggestive of conversation between the deceased and the 
accused shortly before his death, nonetheless, sans contents/details 
thereof.  Without prejudice to the merits of the prosecution case, to be 
essentially settled by the trial Court, nonetheless, petitioner’s case 
squarely falls within the remit of subsection 2 of section 497 of the 
Code of Criminal Procedure 1898; a case for his release on bail stands 
made out. Criminal Petition No.500 of 2020 is converted into appeal 
and allowed; petitioner/appellant shall be released on his furnishing 
bonds in the sum of Rs.500,000/- with two sureties each in the like 
amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/duty Judge.     
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
6th July, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.527 of 2020  
(Against the order dated 28.4.2020 
passed by the High Court of Balochistan, 
Quetta in Crl. B. A.T. No.40/2020) 
 
Noor Bakhsh 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
The State  
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Liaquat Ali Khan Tareen, ASC 
 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR  
 
For the State: 
Syed Baqar Shah, ASC 
 
Date of hearing: 
01.07.2020. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Noor Bukhsh, 
petitioner herein, seeks admission to post arrest bail; he had allegedly 
shot one Abdul Qayyum, way back on 29.9.2013 within the remit of 
Police Station Gawadar on his opposition over an unauthorized gasoline 
outlet, managed by him in the neighbourhood; fire shot injury on the 
spinal cord finally resulted into the death, though after lapse of almost 
six years. Section 324 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, after injured’s 
death has been substituted with section 316 thereof. Repeated 
attempts for bail failed before the Courts below, last being in the High 
Court on 28.04.2020 on account of absence of a fresh ground.  
2. 
 
Heard. 
3. 
 
Petitioner stayed away from law for a period exceeding half 
a decade and was finally arrested on 3.2.2020; being a fugitive from 
law, that too for a pretty long period of time, he has disentitled himself 
to the concessions, ordinarily extended in discretion to an offender. 
While it is for the trial Court to determine the cause of death and 
consequences thereof, the case initially set up in the crime report, 
supported by the statements of the witnesses and medical evidence 
constitutes ‘reasonable grounds’ within the contemplation of section 
 Criminal Petition No.527 of 2020   
2
497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 with space for further 
probe or inquiry in absence whereof, he cannot be released on bail even 
on that score. Petitioner’s last attempt in the High Court through a 
subsequent petition without any fresh ground has rightly been 
declined, calling for no interference by this Court. Petition fails. Leave 
declined.  
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
1st July, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
Mr. Justice Sh. Azmat Saeed, ACJ 
Mr. Justice Ijaz ul Ahsan 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
Criminal Petition No.533 of 2019  
(Against the judgment dated 22.4.2019 
passed by the Peshawar High Court, Bannu 
Bench 
in 
Criminal 
Miscellaneous 
B.A. 
No.123-B/2019). 
 
Alamgir Khan 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
VERSUS 
 
The State and another 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s) 
: Mr. Salahuddin Malik, ASC   
 
 
Mr. M.A. Sheikh, AOR 
 
For the State 
: Mr. Zahid Yousaf Qureshi,  
Addl. A.G. KPK. 
Muhammad Alam, A.S.I. 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 31.7.2019. 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.-   Alamgir Khan, 
petitioner herein, declined downstairs throughout, seeks 
admission to bail; he was surprised by a raiding party, within 
the precincts of Police Station Lakki Marwat, surreptitiously 
siphoning 
natural 
gas 
in 
a 
residential 
premises 
to 
unauthorizedly generate electricity being distributed to a large 
number of consumers in the neighborhood; he is also accused 
of criminally intimidating the contingent, brandishing a pistol 
on them, however took to the heels on arrival of police. 
Appliances 
being 
used, 
comprising 
electric 
generators, 
stabilizers with electric panels as well as other paraphernalia 
to power the system were secured vide inventory. 
2. 
 
Position taken by the learned counsel for the 
petitioner requires an in-depth analysis, essentially on the 
Criminal Petition No.533 of 2019  
 
 
 
 
 
 
2 
 
basis of evidence, yet to be recorded and thus falls far outside 
the barriers of tentative assessment. Statements of the 
witnesses, functionaries of the State with no animus or malice, 
duly corroborated by apparatus secured from the spot, 
constitute ‘reasonable grounds’, within the contemplation of 
Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 to prima 
facie frame the petitioner with the charge that attracts the bar 
contained therein as Section 462-C of the Pakistan Penal Code, 
1860 carries a punishment that may extend to ten years 
rigorous imprisonment. View taken by the Courts below being 
well within the remit of law is not open to any exception. 
Petition fails. Dismissed.   
   
 
Acting Chief Justice 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
Islamabad, the 
31st of July, 2019 
Ghulam Raza/* 
JUDGE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN  
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
MR. JUSTICE UMAR ATA BANDIAL 
MR. JUSTICE SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH 
MR. JUSTICE QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMAD 
 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.540-L OF 2021 
(Against the order dated 31.03.2021 passed by the Lahore High 
Court of Lahore in Crl. Misc. No.19186-B/2021) 
 
 
 
 
Syed Husnain Haider 
 
 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
                                        VERSUS 
 
 
The State and another 
 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Syed Tayyab Nasir Mehmood, ASC 
(video link at Lahore) 
along with Syed Husnain Haider, in 
person (at Islamabad) 
 
 
For the Respondent(s): 
Ch. Muhammad Maqsood Butter, ASC 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing: 
14.07.2021 
 
 
 
 
 
     O R D E R 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- In a family breach, the 
petitioner has been blamed by the complainant, no other than a close 
relative, to have issued him two bank cheques, to the tune of rupees one 
crore forty-seven lac, towards fulfillment of a financial obligation, arisen out 
of a botched sale transaction relating to some piece of land, bounced upon 
presentation; avoiding arrest for a considerable span of time, he has finally 
been declined judicial protection by a learned Judge-in-Chamber of Lahore 
High Court vide order dated 31.3.2021 to argue before us that in the 
absence of any subsisting ‘financial obligation’ he had handed over the 
cheques to his brother Syed Zulqarnain as security instrument for the 
settlement of family feud, fraudulently taken over by the complainant, 
cancellation whereof, is being pursued through a declaratory suit, sub judice 
Criminal Petition No.540-L OF 2021 
 
in a Civil Court at Chunian till date, a position vehemently contested by the 
learned Law Officer with the assistance of counsel for the complainant.  
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
The 
impugned 
instruments 
admittedly 
belonged 
to 
the 
petitioner; these carry a wording on their back as “shorty”, however, the 
learned counsel despite his best attempt has not been able to point out, even 
obliquely, any clause of contract/agreement or any portion thereof, in 
performance whereof, the petitioner purportedly stood surety. Supported by 
statutory presumption of being a valid instrument, a drawer cannot ward off 
the consequences of its failure through bald plea of being an unsuspecting 
surety. Even otherwise, within the family fold in a close degree, the petitioner 
has not been able to point out any mala fide or animus, possibly lurking 
behind his long due arrest in a non-bailable/cognizable offence, a sine qua 
non to divert the usual course of criminal law. View concurrently taken by 
the courts below being well within the remit of law calls for no interference. 
Petition fails. Leave declined.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
  
 
Judge 
ISLAMABAD 
14th July, 2021 
Azmat/* 
“Not approved for Reporting” 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.540-L OF 2021
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.543 of 2020  
(Against the order dated 5.3.2020 passed 
by the Peshawar High Court Bannu Bench 
Bannu in Crl. Misc. No.73-B/2020) 
 
 
Habib Ullah Jan & another 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
The State through A.G. KPK & others 
 
…Respondent(s) 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Adil Aziz Qazi, ASC 
 
Mr. Sher Afzal Khan, ASC 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Fakhruddin Shah, ASC 
 
For the Complainant: 
Mr. Anis M. Shahzad, ASC 
 
Date of hearing: 
07.07.2020. 
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
 Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.-Habib Ullah Jan and 
Asif Ullah Khan are amongst the accused arrayed in a case of 
murderous assault, lodged by Saad Ullah PW. It is alleged that on the 
eventful day, differently armed, they assaulted Kaleem Ullah, Saad 
Ullah and Riffat Ullah, in consequence whereof, each sustained 
multiple injuries, confirmed by medico legal reports. An outstanding 
dispute over a piece of land triggered the episode.  
2. 
 
Having regard to the magnitude of violence endured by the 
witnesses, no less than three in number, prima facie, supported by 
medical evidence, statements of the witnesses and spot recoveries, the 
High Court having found reasonable grounds, standing in impediment 
to petitioners’ release on bail in the absence of any consideration calling 
for further probe so as to circumvent statutory bar embodied in section 
497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, declined the request,  
a conclusion arrived at in its discretion and, on our own analysis, 
found by us as intra vires being judicially structured, no interference is 
called for. Petition fails. Leave declined.   
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
7th July, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Mushir Alam 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
Mr. Justice Amin-ud-Din Khan 
 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.549 of 2020  
(Against the order dated 5.6.2020 passed by the Lahore 
High Court Lahore in Crl. Misc. No.19465-B/2020) 
 
 
Babar Nadeem 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
The State through P.G. Punjab and another   
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Naveed Ahmed Khawaja, ASC 
 
For the State: 
Mirza Abid Majeed,  
 
Additional 
Prosecutor 
General 
Punjab  
along with Tana Tanvir, SHO, M. Akram, 
I/O. 
 
For the Respondent(s): 
Nemo  
 
Date of hearing: 
21.07.2020. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
      Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Manzoor Ahmed, deceased, 
was done to death by two unknown assailants, inside his house, located 
within the remit of Police Station Saddar Arifwala, District Pakpattan at 
9:00 p.m. on 17.2.2020; they vanished into the darkness; identified as 
assassins Muhammad Din, Muhammad Latif and Tanvir Hussain were 
subsequently arrested under section 54 on 29.2.2020; it is upon their 
disclosure that Babar Nadeem, petitioner along with two others was taken 
on board as amongst the abettors behind the scene; one of them, namely, 
Naveed has since been let off from the array. As the investigation 
progressed, the Investigating Officer recorded statements of Sher 
Muhammad and Muhammad Shahbaz PWs on 18.2.2020; according to 
them, they had seen the petitioner along with two others, shortly before the 
 Criminal Petition No.549 of 2020  
2
occurrence, an information that they statedly conveyed to the complainant 
after the occurrence. It is through these statements that the prosecution 
also introduced the motive that related to a brawl between the parties 4/5 
months prior to the incident. 
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
Argument that in the absence of any legal evidence there was 
no occasion for the Courts below to deny judicial protection to the 
petitioner in the face of mala fide vividly lurking behind the intended arrest 
warrants serious consideration. We would refrain to comment upon the 
absence of abettors’ name in the crime report despite their having been 
spotted by the witnesses, shortly before the tragedy struck a small rural 
neighbourhood i.e. Chak No.72-EB, nonetheless, the omission by itself 
brings petitioner’s culpability within the purview of subsection 2 of section 
497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898; combined with exoneration of 
Naveed from the list of abettors, argued as mutually destructive with the 
hypothesis of conspiracy, does admit space to contemplate considerations 
for arrest other than being noble; a case for judicial protection stands made 
out. Petition is converted into appeal and allowed; ad interim bail granted 
vide order dated 8.7.2020 is confirmed upon furnishing a bond in the sum 
of Rs.500,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the 
trial Court.  
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
21st July, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Ghulam Raza/-