IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Mushir Alam 
Mr. Justice Yahya Afridi 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
  
Criminal Petition Nos.371 to 373 & 680 of 2020  
(Against the judgment dated 2.4.2020 passed by the High Court of Sindh 
at Karachi in Special Criminal Anti Terrorism Appeal Nos.66, 67 of 2002 
and confirmation case No.12 of 2002) 
                                 AND 
Crl. M.A. No.37-K & 38-K of 2020 in Crl.Ps. NIL/2020 
(Permission to file and argue) 
 
 
 
The State through P.G. Sindh 
(in Crl. P. Nos.371 to 373/2020) 
 
Ruth Pearl & another  
(in Crl. M.A. Nos.37-K & 38-K/2020) 
 
Ahmad Omer Shaikh 
(in Crl. P. No.680/2020) 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
Ahmed Omer Shaikh 
(in Crl. P. No.371/2020) 
Fahad Nasim Ahmed & others 
(in Crl. P. Nos.372 & 373/2020) 
The State, etc. 
(in Crl. M.A. Nos.37-K & 38-K/2020) 
The State through P.G. Sindh 
(in Crl. P. No.680/2020) 
 
 
….Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
 
Mr. Farooq H. Naek, Sr.ASC assisted by  
 
 
 
 
 
 
Dr. Faiz Rasool, Prosecutor General Sindh 
 
 
 
 
 
Usman Walid Sheikh, Advocate 
 
 
 
 
 
Mr. Hussain Bux Baloch, ADDL. P.G. Sindh 
 
 
 
 
 
Mr. Adnan Shuja Butt, ASC 
 
 
 
 
 
Mr. Muhammad Kassim Mirjat, AOR 
 
 
 
 
 
(in Cr.P. Nos.371 to 373/2020) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Mr. Faisal Siddiqui, ASC assisted by  
 
 
 
 
 
Sheza Ahmed, Advocate 
 
 
 
 
 
(in Cr.M.A. Nos.37-K & 38-K/2020) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Nemo. 
 
 
 
 
 
(in Cr.P. No.680/2020) 
 
For the Respondent(s):  
Nemo. 
 
 
 
 
 
(in Cr.P. Nos.371 to 373/2020 & Cr.M.A. Nos.37-K & 38-K/2020) 
 
Date of hearing: 
28.09.2020. 
 
Criminal Petition Nos.371 to 373 & 680 of 2020 and 
Crl. M.A. No.37-K & 38-K of 2020 in Crl.Ps. NIL/2020 
 
 
 2  
  
 
 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.-  
 
Criminal Petition Nos.371 to 373 of 2020 
 
 
 
Daniel Pearl, Bureau Chief of the Walls Street Journal, a U.S. 
national, hereinafter referred to as the deceased, deputed on some 
assignment in Pakistan, went missing on the 23rd of January, 2002; 
disappearance was reported with Police Station Artillery Maidan South 
Karachi  by his wife Ms. Mariane Pearl at 11:45 p.m. on 4.2.2002.  According 
to the complainant, Nasir Abbas (PW-1), a cab driver, informed her to have 
last dropped the deceased in front of “Village Restaurant” Karachi Saddar; she 
received an email dated 27th of January, 2002, with the photographs of her 
husband, enchained by his captors; they laid the following demands: 
 
     “(A) The provision of Lawyers to Pakistanis detained in US. 
      (B) The release of Pakistanis, jailed in CUBA to Pakistan. 
     (C) 
The return of former TALIBAN AMBASSADOR MULLA  
 
 
ZAEEF, to Pakistan, and 
    (D) 
The return of F-16 FIGHTER JETS to Pakistan or The  
 
 
repayment of money, allocated for those F-16 JETS,  
 
 
as well as 15% interest.” 
 
On 30th of January, 2002, the captors threatened to murder the hostage in 
case their demands were not met within next 24 hours. As the deadline 
expired without concession, the deceased was beheaded; to the horror of the 
viewers; graphic details of the episode, recorded by a video camera, were 
subsequently released to go viral.  
2. 
 
As the investigation progressed, 11 suspects were arrayed as 
culprits for the crime; of them, Amjad Hussain Farooqi alias Haider Farooqi 
alias Hassan Mansoor, Asim alias Qasim, Hashim alias Arif, Hassan, Ahmad 
Bhai and Imtiaz Siddiqui along with an unknown companion, yet to be 
identified, stayed away from law whereas Ahmad Omar Sheikh, Sheikh 
Muhammad Adil, Syed Salman Saqib and Fahad Naseem respondents, were 
arrested and ultimately indicted before an Anti Terrorism Court at Karachi. 
The prosecution relied upon various pieces of circumstantial evidence that 
included confessional statements of the two accused as well to drive home the 
charge, on the basis whereof, the learned trial Judge vide judgment dated 
15.7.2002 convicted the respondents under sections 120-A, 365-A, 302 of the 
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 read with section 6(a) of the Anti Terrorism Act, 
1997; under section 7 of the Act ibid, Ahmad Omar Sheikh, respondent, was 
sentenced to death whereas the remainders to imprisonment for life with fine 
 
Criminal Petition Nos.371 to 373 & 680 of 2020 and 
Crl. M.A. No.37-K & 38-K of 2020 in Crl.Ps. NIL/2020 
 
 
 3  
  
 
of Rs.500,000/- or five years imprisonment in default of payment thereof; they 
were jointly liable to pay Rs.20,00,000/- (equal share) to the widow of the 
deceased; the lifers were extended benefit of section 382-B of the Code of 
Criminal Procedure, 1898. However, a learned Division Bench of the High 
Court of Sindh, while altering conviction of Ahmad Omar Sheikh under section 
362 of the Code ibid with sentence of 7-years rigorous acquitted the 
respondents from the remainder charges vide impugned judgment dated 
02.04.2020, vires whereof, are being assailed by the State through Criminal 
Petition Nos.371, 372 & 373 of 2020; parents of the deceased also questioned 
the impugned acquittals through Criminal Misc. Application Nos.37-K & 38-K 
of 2020 whereas Ahmad Omar Sheikh, convict, filed Criminal Petition No.680 
of 2020 to assail his conviction and sentence on the solitary charge.  
3. 
 
Mr. Farooq H. Naek, Sr.ASC, designated by the Government of 
Sindh to argue the case, contends that with a web of circumstances, 
inescapably implicating the respondents with the commission of a crime, 
most shocking, there was hardly an occasion to acquit them from the 
charge, particularly when the High Court itself maintained conviction and 
sentence on the charge of abduction qua Ahmad Omar Sheikh, recorded 
by the learned trial Court alongside coordinate charges. It is next argued 
that various incriminating pieces of evidence established, both through 
physical as well as scientific means, constituted uninterrupted/ 
continuous chain that inexorably linked the deceased with the 
respondents and their absconding colleagues; according to him, forensic 
evidence, generated without any possibility of human interference, 
conclusively proved the homicidal death subsequent to deceased’s 
abduction, a charge upheld by the High Court itself, for purposes having 
strong nexus with terrorism and, thus, acquittal from the coordinate 
charges was not a possible option through any mode of appraisal of 
evidence.  
 
According to the learned counsel, the prosecution successfully 
proved the conspiracy hatched at Rawalpindi on 11.01.2002, whereby the 
deceased was induced to have his desired meeting with one Syed Mubarak 
Ali Shah Jeelani and it was in this backdrop that he was subsequently 
ensnared fatally at Karachi on a point of time, confirmed by one of the 
prosecution witnesses. He further contends that in the contextual 
backgrounds, 
relevant 
witnesses 
identified 
Ahmad 
Omar 
Sheikh 
respondent whereas the source generating the emails was reached out 
through forensic means, additionally associating internet service providers 
 
Criminal Petition Nos.371 to 373 & 680 of 2020 and 
Crl. M.A. No.37-K & 38-K of 2020 in Crl.Ps. NIL/2020 
 
 
 4  
  
 
who appeared before the Court to successfully face the test of cross-
examination. The learned counsel has referred to the testimonies of Ronal 
Joseph, technical expert, joined John Mulligan (PW-12), both F.B.I. agents 
to bring on record the details of forensic proofs. Recovery of digital 
apparatus i.e. laptop, scanner, polaroid as well as zoom cameras, used by 
the accused to communicate with the deceased’s family, established a 
continuous chain of circumstances unmistakably pointed upon the 
culpability of the accused, additionally reinforced by the confessional 
statements of the two accused, leaving no space for the High Court to 
entertain any hypothesis other than respondents’ guilt, concluded the 
learned counsel.  
 
Mr. Faisal Siddiqi, ASC, while appearing on behalf of deceased’s 
parents, reiterated most of the submissions earlier addressed; he 
additionally argued that sentence awarded to Ahmad Omar Sheikh under 
a penal provision though cited erroneously as section 362 of the Code ibid, 
nonetheless, irresistibly suggested that the High Court, being convinced 
about the abduction of the deceased, had convicted and sentenced the 
respondent on the said charge, driven home through various pieces of 
evidence that equally encompassed the concomitant conclusion of the 
crime and as such the impugned view was not only self-destructive but 
impossible as well and, thus, warrants interference to avoid miscarriage of 
justice.  
4. 
 
Leave to appeal is granted, inter alia, to re-appraise the 
evidence so as to consider the above contentions.  
 
Cr.M.A. No.481 & 483 of 2020 in  
Cr.P. Nos.371, and 372 of 2020 
5. 
 
Through the captioned criminal miscellaneous applications, 
the State has prayed for suspension of the impugned judgment so as to 
hold in abeyance respondents’ release during the pendency of the appeal. 
Notice shall issue to the respondents. Till the next date of hearing, the 
respondents shall not be released from the prison.  
 
Criminal Petition No. 680 of 2020 
6. 
 
Ahmad Omar Sheikh, convict, has assailed his conviction and 
sentence under section 362 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 through the 
captioned petition; his learned counsel Mr. Mahmood A. Sheikh, Sr.ASC, 
reportedly indisposed, is not in attendance, however, in order to ensure 
safe administration of criminal justice, we are inclined to grant leave in the 
 
Criminal Petition Nos.371 to 373 & 680 of 2020 and 
Crl. M.A. No.37-K & 38-K of 2020 in Crl.Ps. NIL/2020 
 
 
 5  
  
 
titled petition with a view to consider as to whether after en bloc acquittal 
of the co-accused and rejection of bulk of prosecution’s evidence, the High 
Court was still justified to convict and sentence the petitioner in isolation 
to the totality of charge.  
 
Crl. M.A. No.37-K & 38-K of 2020 in Crl.Ps. NIL/2020 
7. 
 
Deceased’s parents have filed separate petitions to question 
respondents’ acquittal, though maintainable in view of section 25 (4A) of 
the Anti Terrorism Act, 1997, nonetheless, since leave has already been 
granted to the State to examine the same questions, the criminal 
miscellaneous applications are allowed; office is directed to number these 
petitions and club the same with Cr. Petition Nos.371 to 373 of 2020 with 
opportunity to the learned counsel to canvass his point of view as well.  
8. 
 
Re-list on 7.10.2020. 
 
 
  Judge 
 
 
 
            Judge 
 
 
 
            Judge 
Islamabad, the 
28th September, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-