IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT: 
 
 
MR. JUSTICE UMAR ATA BANDIAL 
MR. JUSTICE SAJJAD ALI SHAH 
 
 
MR. JUSTICE SYED MANSOOR ALI SHAH  
 
 
Civil Petition No. 5599 of 2021 
(On appeal from the judgment/order dated 
14.09.2021 of the Islamabad High Court, 
Islamabad passed in WP No. 3454 of 2020). 
 
 
The Competition Commission of Pakistan, 
Islamabad and others  
   
 
…Petitioner(s)  
Versus 
 
Dalda Foods Limited Karachi   
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s) 
: Mr. Faisal Siddiqi, ASC 
 
  
For Respondent(s)  
: Syed Faisal Hussain Naqvi, ASC 
 
  
Date of Hearing 
: 22.11.2021 
 
O R D E R 
 
 
 
UMAR ATA BANDIAL, J.- Learned counsel for the 
petitioner-Competition Commission of Pakistan (“CCP”) has 
submitted that the paragraph 18 of the impugned judgment 
dated 
14.09.2021 
expects 
the 
CCP 
to 
confront 
the 
respondent, recipient of a notice under Section 37 (1) of the 
Competition Act, 2010 (“Act”), with the material on the basis 
of which CCP has formed its opinion that “a breach of law 
appears plausible and needs to be enquired into”. Such an 
obligation is invoked under Section 37(2) of the Act and 
Section 24A of the General Clauses Act. He submits that the 
CP NO. 5599 OF 2021 
2
impugned notice under Section 37(1) of the Act is issued in 
pursuant of a suo moto power whereas the obligation 
imposed under Section 37(2) of the Act is for a complainant 
before the CCP to satisfy. Under Section 37(1) ibid the inquiry 
envisaged by the Act is meant to collect and evaluate relevant 
information and material on which fact finding may be done. 
At the inquiry stage there are allegations in the field but 
“relevant facts” in relation thereto are yet to be ascertained. 
These cannot be provided at the stage of notice of inquiry. 
Consequently, the direction is onerous and misconceived.  
2. 
 
He has next drawn our attention to paragraph 15 
of the impugned judgment wherein it is held that a notice by 
the CCP calling for information relating to breach of obligation 
of an undertaking under Section 3 or Section 4 of the Act 
must not violate the rule against self incrimination contained 
in Article 13(a) of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of 
Pakistan, 1973 (“Constitution”). Learned counsel contends 
that Article 13 of the Constitution is concerned with judicial 
proceedings of (criminal) prosecution and the resulting 
punishment and not with the conduct of a fact finding inquiry 
which lacks the attributes either of the afore-said stages of 
judicial proceedings. Calling for information is a necessary 
part of any inquiry. Consequently, the observation made 
regarding rights and Article 13(a) of the Constitution but 
CP NO. 5599 OF 2021 
3
without reference to the law in relation thereto is hasty and 
unsubstantiated.  
3. 
 
Thirdly, he has referred us to paragraph 20 of the 
impugned judgment wherein the different forms of evidence 
that are admissible before the Commission in its adjudicatory 
proceedings have been specified in Regulation 26A(2) of the 
Competition Commission (General Enforcement) Regulations 
2007. These include verifiable transcripts of tape recordings, 
unedited versions of video recording, electronic mail, 
telephone records etc. He again emphasised that the said 
regulation identifies the type of evidentiary material that may 
be adduced in proceedings of the Commission wherein 
evidence is recorded. At the inquiry stage where the requisite 
material concerning an allegation collected for fact finding 
purposes. In this regard, it is the rules of natural justice that 
are relevant and not the strict application of the Regulations 
which would hamper the conduct of the inquiry.  
4. 
 
In 
response 
the 
learned 
counsel 
for 
the 
respondent has read from paragraph 36 of the impugned 
judgment wherein the CCP is permitted to exercise its 
authority through a reasoned order to undertake an enquiry 
under Section 37 of the Act on material available with it 
which discloses a plausible case against the respondent. He 
submits that he would be satisfied if the requisite material is 
CP NO. 5599 OF 2021 
4
provided to the respondent even though no reasoned order is 
passed.  
5. 
 
We consider that the points raised by the learned 
counsel for the petitioner-CCP highlight certain weaknesses 
in the impugned judgment. Also paragraph 36 thereof by 
requiring a reasoned order to be passed under Section 37(2) 
of the Act imposes a condition which is not relevant to the 
present proceedings which have been initiated under Section 
37(1) of the Act. It is not explained by the impugned judgment 
why and to what extent the requirements of Section 37(2) ibid 
ought to be read into Section 37(1) of the Act.   
6. 
 
Be that as it may, the impugned judgment has 
adopted a dynamic view of the rights of a respondent before 
the CCP. We would like to consider the impugned judgment to 
examine the object and meaning of, inter alia, the provisions 
of the Act on the points that have been highlighted above. 
Accordingly, leave is granted in this petition, inter alia, on the 
said points.   
7. 
 
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that 
the impugned inquiry proceedings under Section 37 (1) of the 
Act apply not only to the respondent manufacturer but to all 
members of the Ghee and Cooking Oil Industry. However, the 
impugned notices have been assailed by the respondent only. 
As a result of the impugned judgment the inquiry proceedings 
against all undertakings who have not even challenged the 
CP NO. 5599 OF 2021 
5
notices issued to them by the petitioners are stalled. He has, 
however, informed that the factual material for initiating the 
inquiry are available on record in the form of a working paper 
dated 27.07.2020 prepared by the CCP. That paper explains 
the basis for initiation of inquiry by the Commission under its 
resolution passed on 30.07.2020. The petitioner is statedly 
willing to provide the said material to the respondent through 
a fresh notice. Let that be done.  
8. 
 
In the meanwhile the impugned judgment shall 
remain suspended.    
 
 
 
 
    
Judge   
 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
 
 
Islamabad 
22.11.2021 
Naseer+Irshad Hussain/* 
Judge