sharif2uys/supreme-court-of-pak-judgments huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, CJ 
Mr. Justice Ijaz Ul Ahsan 
 
 
 
Criminal Petitions No. 562, 563 and 564 of 2019 
(Against the judgment dated 04.03.2019 passed by the Peshawar 
High Court, Peshawar in Bail Cancellation Application No. 2358-P, 
2088-P of 2017 and 2359-P of 2017) 
 
 
Fawad Ali   
 
 
(in all cases)  
 
 
…Petitioner 
 
 
 
 
 
versus 
The State, etc.  
(in all cases) 
          …Respondents 
 
 
For the petitioner: 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, ASC 
(in all cases) 
 
For the respondents: 
N.R. (in all cases) 
 
Date of hearing: 
25.07.2019 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, CJ.:  
 
Criminal Miscellaneous Applications No. 772, 773 and 774 of 
2019 in Criminal Petitions No. 562, 563 and 564 of 2019 
 
  
The main petitions are barred by 45 days and the reason 
mentioned 
in 
these 
miscellaneous 
applications 
seeking 
condonation of the delay in filing of the main petitions has not 
been found by us to be valid or sufficient for the purpose. These 
miscellaneous applications are, therefore, dismissed.  
 
Criminal Petitions No. 562, 563 and 564 of 2019 
 
2. 
These petitions are dismissed as barred by time.  
Criminal Petitions No. 562, 563 and 564 of 2019 
 
2
 
3. 
Before parting with this order we would like to observe that 
these petitions seeking cancellation of the private respondents’ bail 
are even otherwise misconceived because the impugned judgments 
passed by the High Court show that during the pendency of the 
proceedings before the High Court the private respondents in these 
petitions had failed to appear and resultantly non-bailable 
warrants for their arrest had been issued which could not be 
executed. The law already stands settled that if an accused person 
admitted to bail is subsequently declared a Proclaimed Offender or 
non-bailable warrants for his arrest are issued then such 
declaration or issuance of non-bailable warrants ipso facto 
amounts to cancellation of that accused person’s bail. A reference 
in this respect may be made to the cases of Yusuf Masih v the State 
(1987 P.Cr.L.J. 1412), Muhammad Boota v Muhammad Arshad and 
another (Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1481-CB of 2009 decided by 
the Lahore High Court, Lahore on 09.02.2009), Sharafat Ali v The 
State, etc. (Criminal Revision No. 680 of 2008 decided by the 
Lahore High Court, Lahore on 15.04.2009 which order was 
subsequently upheld by this Court through the order dated 
04.06.2009 passed in Criminal Petition No. 438-L of 2009) and 
Atta-ur-Rehman v Rana Phool, etc. (Criminal Petition No. 558-L of 
2014 decided by this Court on 17.07.2014).  
    
 
Chief Justice 
 
Judge 
Islamabad 
25.07.2019 
Approved for reporting.  
 
Arif
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
  
 
Criminal Petition Nos.591 of 2020 
(Against the order dated 05.06.2020 in Cr.M. 
(BA) 229-M/2020 passed by the Peshawar 
High Court, Minhora Bench (Dar-ul-Qaza), Swat  
 
 
Sheqab Muhammad 
 
.…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
The State and others 
  
….Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Abdul Latif Afridi, ASC 
 
For the State: 
 
Mr. Anis M. Shahzad, ASC 
 
 
 
 
with Samiullah, SHO and Abdul Kamal, I.O. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
For the Complainant:     In person 
 
Date of hearing:              07.08.2020. 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
  
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Petitioner is amongst the 
array of accused, blamed to have murderously assaulted the PWs at  
9:10 a.m. on 10.4.2020 within the precincts of Police Station Himmat 
Khan Shaheen Kalangi, District Malakand, in the backdrop of a dispute 
over immovable property; fire shot attributed to the petitioner is confirmed 
by a medico legal certificate.  
2. 
 
Heard.  
3. 
 
Arguments that ocular account stands contradicted by medical 
evidence and in the absence of an independent witness from the public, 
petitioner’s general participation, resulting into an injury on a non-vital part 
of the body, particularly in the absence of repeated fire shot, squarely brings 
his case within the remit of further probe, are not only beside the mark but 
also cannot be attended without undertaking an in-depth analysis of the 
prosecution case, an exercise forbidden by law at bail stage. In a daylight 
affair, two persons sustained firearm injuries besides the one having endured 
violence   through   blunt   means   and   as   such   requires   no   public 
Criminal Petition Nos.591 of 2020 
  
  
 
2
support to drive home the charge; their statements supported by medical 
examinations of even date, cumulatively bring petitioner’s case prima facie 
within the mischief of section 324 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, hit by 
statutory prohibition, in view whereof, he cannot be released on bail in the 
absence 
of 
any 
consideration 
within 
the 
purview 
of 
subsection  
2 of section 497 of the Code ibid. Similarly, murderous assault as defined in 
the section ibid draws no anatomical distinction between vital or non-vital 
parts of human body. Once the triggered is pressed and the victim is 
effectively targeted, “intention or knowledge” as contemplated by the section 
ibid is manifested; the course of a bullet is not controlled or steered by 
assailant’s choice nor can he claim any premium for a poor marksmanship. 
Exercise of discretion by the High Court being well within the bounds of law 
calls for no interference. Petition fails. Leave declined.    
 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
7th August, 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.6-P of 2015 
(Against the judgment dated 10.12.2014 passed by the 
Peshawar High Court, Mingora Bench (Dar ul Qaza) Swat 
in Cr. A. No.2-m/2013) 
 
State through A.G. KP, Peshawar 
 
…Petitioner  
Versus 
 
Hakim Zada, etc. 
..Respondent  
     
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Malik Akhtar Hussain Awan, Addl. A.G. KP 
 
For the Respondent(s): N.R. 
 
Date of hearing: 
 
8.7.2021 
 
ORDER  
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J-. Respondent was tried by 
a learned Additional Sessions Judge at Matta, Swat for committing Qatl-i-
Amd of Mst. Rekhma, no other than his better half; he himself reported the 
incident to the police on 28.6.2012, alleging suicide, turned out as homicide 
during investigation; upon indictment, he was sentenced to imprisonment 
for life vide judgment dated 13.12.2012, however, a Division Bench of 
Peshawar High Court, Mingora Bench considering the death as suicidal 
acquitted him from the charge vide impugned judgment dated 10.12.2014, 
vires whereof, are being assailed, primarily, on the ground that autopsy 
report conclusively ruled out possibility of suicide as the medical officer 
noted a complete scar, without obliquity, around the neck, unambiguously 
suggesting manual constriction of the neck with a ligature, a circumstance 
that escaped notice by the High Court and, thus, clamours for explanation 
from the respondent with whom she spent her last moments under the 
same roof. Leave is granted to consider, inter alia, the above contention with 
Cr.P.6-P/2015 
2
a view to secure the ends of justice. Send for the respondents through 
bailable warrant in the sum of Rs.200,000/- with one surety in the like 
amount, returnable to the Assistant Registrar of this Court at Peshawar, to 
be executed by the Station House Officer, within a fortnight.  
 
 
 
Judge  
 
 
 
Judge  
Peshawar,  
8th July, 2021 
Azmat/- 
‘Not approved for reporting’
In the Supreme Court of Pakistan 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
Present: 
Mr. Justice Anwar Zaheer Jamali, HCJ 
Mr. Justice Ejaz Afzal Khan 
Mr. Justice Mushir Alam 
 
Criminal Petition No.604 of 2015. 
(on appeal from judgment of Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, 
dated 29.7.2015, passed in Crl. Misc No.4327-B/2015) 
 
Nisar Ahmed 
…Petitioner 
Versus 
The State, etc 
… Respondents 
 
For the petitioner:  
Mr. Khadim Hussain Qaiser, ASC. 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR. 
 
Respondents: 
 
N.R. 
 
Date of hearing: 
 
08.9.2015 
 
JUDGMENT 
 
 
Anwar Zaheer Jamali, C.J.- Petitioner is one of the 
nominated accused in crime No.324/2012, dated 08.12.2012, P.S 
Shahkot, District Sahiwal, registered under sections 302, 324, 337-
A(i), 337-A(ii), 337-F(i), 337-F(iii), 148, 149 PPC with the allegations 
that he alongwith nine other co-accused, while forming an unlawful 
assembly, committed qatl-i-amd of Yasir Abbas and caused injuries to 
three other persons. The petitioner was assigned specific role of 
causing fatal injury to the deceased. 
2. 
The petitioner was arrested on 14.1.2013 and since then 
he is stated to be in custody. The first bail application moved him 
before the Lahore High Court, being criminal miscellaneous No.2148-B 
Crl.P-604/2015. 
2
of 2014, was dismissed on 04.6.2014; his second bail application, 
being criminal miscellaneous No.1735-B/2015 was dismissed vide 
order dated 15.5.2015 and the third bail application, being criminal 
miscellaneous No.3819-B/2015, was dismissed as not pressed vide 
order dated 29.6.2015. In this manner, as it appears from the case 
record, criminal Misc. No.4327-B/2015 was the fourth bail 
application, which was dismissed by the High Court through the 
impugned order dated 29.7.2015. 
3. 
We have heard the arguments of learned ASC for the 
petitioner. He has contended that the petitioner is entitled for grant 
of bail, as compliance of the directions issued by the High Court in its 
orders dated 04.6.2014 and 15.5.2015, regarding expeditious 
disposal of the criminal case against the petitioner, has not been 
made and further filing of direct complaint by respondent No.2 has 
furnished a fresh ground to the petitioner to move another bail 
application. 
4. 
We have scanned the material placed on record and are 
unable to subscribe to such submissions of the learned ASC. Neither 
non-compliance of the directions issued to the trial Court to conclude 
the trial expeditiously or within some specified time can be 
considered as valid ground for grant of bail to an accused, being alien 
to the provisions of section 497, Cr.P.C, nor filing of direct complaint 
will have any bearing as regards earlier bail refusing orders, which 
have attained finality, unless some fresh ground could be shown by 
Crl.P-604/2015. 
3
the petitioner for consideration of his request for grant of bail afresh, 
which is lacking in the present case. 
5. 
This being the position, leave is refused and this petition 
is dismissed. 
 
 
 
 
 
Islamabad, 
08th September, 2015. 
Not approved for reporting. 
ﺖﻗاﺪﺻ 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Mushir Alam 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
  
Criminal Petition No.606 of 2020 
(Against the judgment dated 15.05.2020 passed by 
the Peshawar High Court Peshawar in Cr.M.BA. 
No.1276-P/2020) 
 
 
Dad Khan 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
The State  
….Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
 
Ms. Neelam A. Khan, ASC 
 
For the State: 
Raja Inaam Ameen Minhas,  
 
Special Prosecutor, ANF along with Shamim 
Raza, SI 
 
Date of hearing: 
31.08.2020. 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
  
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- An Anti Narcotic Force 
contingent, on a tip off, intercepted Rahem Taj accused in the departure 
lounge of Bacha Khan International Airport, while boarding a Saudi Arabia 
bound flight with a substantial quantity of Methamphetamine, a lethal 
narcotic substance. As the investigation progressed, the petitioner was 
taken on board as being part of the cartel behind the consignment; he had 
allegedly booked a room in a local hotel where the accused, three in 
number, stayed the night preceding the flight and it was on account of this 
overnight stay that the investigating officer held him privy to the crime 
alongside others.  
 2. 
 
Heard.  
 3. 
 
We have examined the available record that depicts the 
petitioner to have booked a room in a local hotel wherein the three accused 
statedly stayed together. The learned Law Officer for the Anti Narcotic Force 
has not been able to point out any material to confirm presence of the  
principal accused with the petitioner except for latter’s statement recorded 
during custody nor there is any data available with the prosecution to 
Criminal Petition No.606 of 2020 
 
 
 2 
  
  
 
establish petitioner’s presence at or around the airport before departure of 
the flight, therefore, for the present, petitioner’s culpability as an abettor, 
aiding the crime in association with the principal offender, within the 
contemplation of section 14 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 
so as to attract the bar provided under section 51 thereof, warrants further 
probe; a case for his release on bail stands made out. Criminal Petition 
No.606 of 2020 is converted into appeal and allowed; petitioner/appellant 
shall be released on bail on furnishing bond in the sum of Rs.500,000/- 
with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial 
Court/duty Judge.  
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
31st August, 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.610 of 2020 
(Against the judgment dated 21.5.2020 passed by 
the Lahore High Court Lahore in Crl. Misc. 
No.20425-B/2020) 
 
 
Muhammad Noman Munir  
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
The State & another   
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Syed Qamar Hussain Sabzwari, ASC 
 
For the Respondent(s): 
N.R. 
 
Date of hearing: 
10.07.2020. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
      Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Surprised at 12:30 p.m. on 
23.1.2020 by a contingent of Police Station Kotwali Sialkot, Muhammad 
Noman Munir, petitioner herein, was found in possession of cannabis 
weighed as 1380 grams with a lethal combination of 07 grams of heroin; 
courts below declined his request for admission to bail.  
 
Submissions at the bar range from absence of a witness from the 
public to a quantity bordering slightly beyond the volume covered by 
section 9 (c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.  
2. 
 
Heard. 
3. 
 
1380 grams of cannabis with 07 grams of heroin squarely fall 
within the mischief of the section ibid that attracts prohibition embodied in 
section 51 of the Act ibid and as such the argument being presumptuous 
is beside the mark. Insofar as non-association of a witness from the public 
is concerned, people collected at the scene, despite request abstained to 
assist the law and it is so mentioned in the crime report itself, a usual 
conduct symptomatic of societal apathy towards civic responsibilities. 
Criminal Petition No.610 of 2020 
  
 
2
Even otherwise, the members of the contingent being functionaries of the 
State are second to none in their status, with their acts statutorily 
presumed, prima facie, as intra vires. Refusal by the Courts below being 
well within the remit of law calls for no interference. Petition fails. Leave 
declined.  
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
10th 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.619 of 2020  
(Against the judgment dated 17.2.2020 of the 
Peshawar High Court, Peshawar passed in Bail 
Petition No.56-P/2020) 
 
 
 
Aqal Khan 
 
.…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
The State and another 
….Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
 
Mr. Hussain Ali, ASC 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
For the State: 
 
 
Mr. Anis M. Shahzad, ASC 
 
 
Muhammad Ilyas, I.O. 
 
For the Complainant: 
Mr. Riazat ul Haq, ASC 
 
Date of hearing: 
03.08.2020. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
       Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.-   Aqal 
Khan, 
petitioner 
herein, allegedly accompanied Meeran Jan, co-accused, no other than his 
real brother, attributed fatal shot to Maseet Khan deceased, at 9:00 a.m. 
on 09.11.2019, within the remit of Police Station Bara in the backdrop of a 
past feud; Courts below declined the request on his having been found in 
the community of intention with the co-accused, still away from law. It is 
alleged that the petitioner, after the incident, took away a pistol, carried by 
the deceased and got it recovered after his arrest, a circumstance that 
conclusively established his presence at the scene so as to stand 
disentitled to the concession of bail, no overt act notwithstanding.  
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
It would be less than expedient to comment upon the factual 
aspects/merits of the case, however, what is evident from the record is 
that during his, seemingly, unanticipated encounter with the deceased, the 
Criminal Petition No.619 of 2020  
  
 
2
later was singularly targeted by the co-accused; first information report 
sans details of snatching of deceased’s gun by the petitioner and as such, 
circumstances cumulatively hovering over the incident, squarely brings 
petitioner’s case within the purview of sub-section 2 of Section 497 of the 
Code of Criminal Procedure 1898; a case for his admission to bail stands 
made out; he shall be so released upon furnishing bonds in the sum of 
Rs.500,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction 
of the trial Court/duty Judge; delay in filing of petition is condoned which 
is converted in to appeal and allowed. 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
3rd August, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Ghulam Raza/-
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Mushir Alam 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
  
Criminal Petition No.630 of 2020 
(Against the order dated 4.6.2020 passed by the Lahore 
High Court Multan Bench Multan in Crl. Misc. No.1598-
B/2020) 
 
 
Muhammad Mumtaz Ahmad & others 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
The State & another  
….Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR 
 
 
 
 
with petitioners in person  
 
 
 
 
 
 
For the State: 
Mr. M. Sarwar Sidhu,  
 
Additional Prosecutor General Punjab 
 
 
 
 
with Taj Muhammad, SI. 
 
  
For the Complainant: 
Mr. Zulfiqar Khalid Maluka, ASC 
Date of hearing: 
24.08.2020. 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
  
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Petitioners are blamed to 
have caused injuries, after forming an unlawful assembly, to the witnesses 
inside the safety of complainant’s home located within the remit of Police 
Station Miranpur District Vehari; they agitated a cross version that failed 
with the police. A learned Additional Sessions Judge at Mailsi primarily 
declined their request for bail in anticipation to their arrest on the ground 
that after the assault they repeated violence for which two different First 
Information Reports dated 05.02.2020 and 09.02.2020 were lodged during 
the period they were on ad interim bails; they did not display a better 
conduct in the High Court either; they were admitted to ad interim  
pre-arrest bail by a learned Judge-in-Chamber on 20.3.2020 on the 
condition of bonds, however, till the time of final hearing that took place as 
late as on 4.6.2020 they were found to have failed to file the bonds as 
directed by the Court.  
 
2. 
 
Heard. 
Criminal Petition No.630 of 2020 
 
 2 
  
  
 
3. 
 
It is a run of the mill criminal case wherein two sides 
confronted each other over an incident of eve-teasing; it graduated into a 
situation wherein both sides appeared to have sustained injuries and 
despite considerable lapse of time in the face of petitioners’ failure in their 
cross-version, they remained away from law by invoking a remedy which 
has judicially been devised to protect the innocent from the rigors of abuse 
of process of law initiated for purposes other than noble; the protection 
cannot be granted to stifle the investigative process and as such 
petitioners’ case does not fall in that category, particularly in view of their 
conduct before the Courts below, found by us as far from being enviable. 
Petition fails. Leave declined. 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
24th August, 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.640 of 2020  
(Against order dated 5.6.2020 passed by the Peshawar High Court 
Peshawar in Cr. Misc. (BA) No.1446-P/2020) 
 
Kamran 
 
.…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
Kamran Malik and another 
….Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
 
Mr. Hussain Ali, ASC 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
For the State: 
Ms. Aisha Tasneem, ASC  
 
with Siraj, I.O. 
 
Date of hearing: 
30.07.2020. 
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Waseem Aslam, Waqas Aslam 
and Siddique Aslam, real brothers inter se,  were shot dead  at 8:30 p.m. 
on 14.1.2020 within the precincts of Police Station  Bhana-Marri 
Peshawar; Kamran Malik, complainant survived the assault unscathed. 
Muhammad Ishaq, co-accused, is assigned fatal shots in the deadly 
assault while the petitioner, no other than his son, is blamed to have 
exhorted him to take on the deceased. A previous brawl is cited as motive 
for the crime.  
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
Awful magnitude of violence and resultant loss of life 
notwithstanding, nonetheless, the petitioner though statedly present with 
other family members outside his home where the deceased had gone to 
lodge complaint for the previous incident, is not attributed any harm to 
them, as on prosecution’s own showing, he allegedly instigated his father, 
otherwise authoritatively placed on the parental rung. Question as to 
whether, instead of taking deadly initiative himself, he preferred to 
persuade his father for the misadventure, a role, contrary to the traditions, 
brings the accusation within the ambit of subsection 2 of section 497 of 
the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and thus, would be best settled after 
Criminal Petition No.640 of 2020  
 
 
 
2
recording of evidence, therefore, he cannot be kept behind the bars merely 
as a measure of punishment. Investigation being complete, petitioner’s 
continuous detention is not likely to serve any useful purpose, beneficial to 
the prosecution. Criminal petition is converted into appeal and allowed; 
petitioner shall be released on bail subject to 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.  
 
These are the reasons of our short order of even date, reproduced 
below: 
“For reasons to follow, this petition is converted 
into appeal and allowed; petitioner shall be 
released on bail subject to furnishing bond 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 
30th July, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-