IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Umar Ata Bandial 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
Criminal Petition No.251 of 2020  
 (Against order dated 6.2.2020 passed by 
the Lahore High Court Lahore in Crl. Misc. 
No.2091-B/2020) 
 
 
Alamgir Khan 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
The State & another 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Abdul Latif Afridi, ASC 
 
  
For the State: 
Mr. Ahmed Raza Gillani, Additional P.G. 
Punjab 
with 
M. 
Nawaz 
SHO 
and  
M. Sarwar, SI, P.S. Civil Lines, Lahore. 
 
 
Date of hearing: 
30.03.2020. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- Behind bars since 
01.12.2019, Alamgir Khan alias Alamgir Wazir, petitioner, seeks 
admission to bail; it is alleged that on 29.11.2019, at about 4:30 p.m, 
he delivered an incendiary speech, on a loud speaker, to a rally 
comprising 250/300 participants on the Mall Road Lahore; speakers 
incited the participants through inflammatory addresses against the 
State institutions, video streamed by the officials deployed at the scene 
captured the incident; a case vide FIR No.990 of 2019 under Sections 
124-A, 290, 291 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 read with Section 16 
of the Maintenance of Public Order 1960 and Section  6 of the Punjab 
Sound Systems (Regulations) Act 2015 was registered on the complaint 
of Muhammad Nawaz SI with Police Station Civil Lines Lahore on 
01.12.2019.  
2. 
 
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the 
petitioner, hailing from the District South Wazirastan, is an errant 
youth, emotionally devastated by colossal loss of lives of his clan 
including that of his father at the hands of Taliban in the aftermaths of 
Criminal Petition No.251 of 2020  
 
 
2
war against terror and as such his outburst cannot be viewed as 
seditious within the contemplation of section 124-A of the Code ibid; it 
is next argued that offence of sedition though possibly punishable with 
imprisonment for life, nonetheless, carries the possibility of shorter 
sentence extending to three years while the coordinate charges do not 
attract the “prohibition”. Referring to clean antecedents, Mr. Abdul Latif 
Afridi, ASC, under instructions, emphatically pledged petitioner’s 
discreet and cautious future conduct. Learned Law Officer contested 
the plea by relying upon the transcript of the impugned speech to argue 
that the petitioner not only disrupted the public life on a thoroughfare 
in the metropolis but also incited sedition to the public at large and, 
thus, his release would be prejudicial to peace, security and tranquility. 
3. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
4. 
 
Freedom of speech is a most cherished right, guaranteed 
under the Constitution; it is certainly subject to “reasonable 
restrictions” within the contemplation of Article 19 thereof; whether in 
his outburst, mentioned in the transcript, the petitioner contravened 
the stipulated restrictions, is a question to be best settled by the trial 
Court, having regard to the totality of the impugned discourse, after 
conclusion of evidence. State must be benign upon dissent and 
criticism of its citizens, no matter how crudely articulated or misplaced, 
on the issues of desecration of the right to life during war through 
opinions, though subjective, nonetheless, actuated by personal 
anguish; it must stand on surer foundations.  
 
Petitioner is a student, his days of incarceration are serving no 
useful purpose to the prosecution. Criminal Petition is converted into 
appeal and same is allowed; the petitioner shall be released upon 
furnishing bond in the sum of Rs.100,000/- with one surety in the like 
to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Magistrate. 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
30th March, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-