Lawsenseate

08/06/2026

07/06/2026

CRL,P.L.A # 450//L/2026

جہاں قانون جرمانہ کی سزا کی بھی اجازت دیتا ہو، وہاں ضمانت کا حق مزید مضبوط ہوتا ہے۔
___
ممکن ہے آخرکار ملزم کو صرف جرمانہ کی سزا ملے، اس لیے قبل از گرفتاری ضمانت دینے کا جواز مزید مضبوط ہو جاتا ہے۔

---
اس فیصلے میں عدالتِ عظمیٰ نے چند اہم قانونی اصول (Legal Propositions) واضح کیے ہیں:

1۔ نان پروہیبٹری کلاز (Non-Prohibitory Clause) کے مقدمات میں ضمانت اصول ہے

عدالت نے قرار دیا کہ دفعہ 462-J PPC کی سزا دو سال تک ہے، لہٰذا یہ جرم دفعہ 497 Cr.P.C کی نان پروہیبٹری کلاز میں آتا ہے۔ ایسے مقدمات میں:

> ضمانت دینا اصول (Rule) ہے جبکہ انکار استثناء (Exception) ہے۔

ضمانت صرف غیر معمولی حالات میں روکی جا سکتی ہے۔

---

2۔ غیر معمولی حالات ثابت کرنا استغاثہ کی ذمہ داری ہے

عدالت نے قرار دیا کہ نان پروہیبٹری جرم میں 8ضمانت روکنے کے لیے پراسیکیوشن کو یہ دکھانا ہوگا کہ:

ملزم فرار ہو سکتا ہے؛

گواہوں یا ثبوتوں پر اثرانداز ہو سکتا ہے؛

دوبارہ جرم کرنے کا خطرہ ہے۔

اگر ایسے حالات موجود نہ ہوں تو ضمانت دی جانی چاہیے۔

---

3۔ دفعہ 161 Cr.P.C کے بیانات بذاتِ خود مضبوط شہادت نہیں

سپریم کورٹ نے واضح کیا کہ:

> پولیس کے تحت ریکارڈ شدہ دفعہ 161 Cr.P.C کے بیانات substantive evidence نہیں ہوتے۔

اس لیے صرف ان بیانات کی بنیاد پر ضمانت مسترد نہیں کی جا سکتی۔

---

4۔ تفتیشی افسر کی رائے عدالت پر لازم نہیں

عدالت نے کہا:

> Investigating Officer کی یہ رائے کہ ملزم قصوروار ہے، عدالت پر binding نہیں ہوتی۔

عدالت کو اپنا آزادانہ ذہن استعمال کرکے ریکارڈ کا جائزہ لینا ہوتا ہے۔

---

5۔ ضمانت کے مرحلے پر ٹرائل نہیں کیا جا سکتا

عدالت نے قرار دیا کہ:

تفتیشی مواد کی حتمی جانچ ٹرائل کورٹ کا کام ہے؛

ضمانت کے مرحلے پر صرف عارضی (Tentative) جائزہ لیا جاتا ہے؛

عدالت کو قبل از وقت جرم ثابت یا غیر ثابت نہیں کرنا چاہیے۔

---

6۔ جہاں قانون صرف جرمانہ کی سزا کی بھی اجازت دیتا ہو، وہاں ضمانت کا حق مزید مضبوط ہوتا ہے

دفعہ 462-J میں سزا:

قید،

جرمانہ،

یا دونوں

ہو سکتی ہے۔

لہٰذا عدالت نے قرار دیا کہ ممکن ہے آخرکار ملزم کو صرف جرمانہ کی سزا ملے، اس لیے قبل از گرفتاری ضمانت دینے کا جواز مزید مضبوط ہو جاتا ہے۔

---

7۔ شخصی آزادی (Personal Liberty) کو بنیادی اہمیت حاصل ہے

عدالت نے کہا کہ:

> آزادی کا حق آئینی قدر (Constitutional Value) رکھتا ہے۔

معمولی نوعیت کے مالی نقصان کے مقدمات میں گرفتاری کے نتیجے میں:

روزگار کا نقصان،

معاشرتی بدنامی،

مالی مشکلات،

اور آزادی سے محرومی

کو بھی مدنظر رکھا جائے گا۔

8۔ ضمانت کے فیصلے میں دی گئی آبزرویشنز عارضی ہوتی ہیں

سپریم کورٹ نے آخر میں واضح کیا کہ:

> ضمانت دیتے وقت کی گئی تمام آبزرویشنز صرف Tentative ہیں اور ٹرائل کورٹ ان سے متاثر ہوئے بغیر مقدمہ کا فیصلہ کرے گی۔

اس فیصلے کا اہم قانونی اصول (Ratio Decidendi)

نان پروہیبٹری جرائم میں، خصوصاً جہاں قانون صرف جرمانہ کی سزا کی بھی اجازت دیتا ہو، اور استغاثہ کوئی غیر معمولی وجہ ثابت نہ کر سکے، وہاں شخصی آزادی کو ترجیح دیتے ہوئے قبل از گرفتاری یا بعد از گرفتاری ضمانت دی جانی چاہیے۔

25/04/2026

1. ٹرائل کس سیکشن کے تحت لگتا ہے؟
​ فوجداری ٹرائل کا آغاز مختلف عدالتوں میں مختلف دفعات کے تحت ہوتا ہے:
​مجسٹریٹ کی عدالت میں ٹرائل: یہ دفعہ 241-A سے 250 CrPC کے تحت ہوتا ہے۔
​سیشن عدالت میں ٹرائل: یہ دفعہ 265-A سے 265-N CrPC کے تحت ہوتا ہے۔
​جب پولیس دفعہ 173 CrPC کے تحت چالان (چاہے وہ مکمل ہو یا نامکمل) عدالت میں پیش کر دیتی ہے اور عدالت اس کا نوٹس (Cognizance) لے لیتی ہے، تو ٹرائل کا عمل شروع ہو جاتا ہے۔
​2. کیا ٹرائل کے دوران تفتیش ہو سکتی ہے؟
​جی ہاں، ٹرائل شروع ہونے کے بعد بھی تفتیش جاری رہ سکتی ہے۔ قانون کی نظر میں چالان پیش کرنا تفتیش کے دروازے بند نہیں کرتا۔
​دفعہ 173(8) CrPC: یہ دفعہ پولیس کو اختیار دیتی ہے کہ چالان جمع کروانے کے بعد بھی اگر کوئی نیا ثبوت یا گواہ سامنے آئے، تو وہ مزید تفتیش (Further Investigation) کر سکتی ہے۔
​سپلیمنٹری چالان (بقیہ چالان): مزید تفتیش کے نتیجے میں پولیس جو نئی رپورٹ تیار کرتی ہے، اسے "بقیہ چالان" کہا جاتا ہے اور اسے ٹرائل کے دوران کسی بھی وقت عدالت میں پیش کیا جا سکتا ہے۔
​3. تفتیش کب تک ہو سکتی ہے؟ (حدود و قیود)
​تفتیش کے حوالے سے وقت کی کوئی آخری حد مقرر نہیں ہے، لیکن اس کے لیے کچھ اصول ہیں:
​فیصلے سے پہلے تک: قانونی طور پر تفتیش اس وقت تک جاری رہ سکتی ہے جب تک عدالت اپنا حتمی فیصلہ (Judgment) نہ سنا دے۔
​عدالت کی اجازت: جب ٹرائل باقاعدہ شروع ہو چکا ہو، تو عام طور پر پولیس عدالت کو مطلع کرتی ہے کہ ہم مزید تفتیش کر رہے ہیں۔
​دوبارہ تفتیش (Re-investigation) بمقابلہ مزید تفتیش (Further Investigation): اعلیٰ عدالتوں (سپریم کورٹ) کے فیصلوں کے مطابق، پولیس "مزید تفتیش" تو کر سکتی ہے لیکن پورے کیس کی "دوبارہ تفتیش" (نئے سرے سے) کرنے کے لیے ٹھوس وجوہات اور بعض اوقات اعلیٰ پولیس افسران یا عدالت کی اجازت درکار ہوتی ہے۔
​4. اہم قانونی نظائر (Case Laws)
​PLD 2011 SC 616: سپریم کورٹ نے قرار دیا کہ چالان پیش ہونے کا مطلب یہ نہیں کہ تفتیش ختم ہو گئی۔ اگر نئے حقائق سامنے آئیں تو پولیس دفعہ 173(8) کے تحت مزید تفتیش کر کے اضافی ثبوت پیش کر سکتی ہے۔
​2002 SCMR 542: عدالت نے واضح کیا کہ ٹرائل کے دوران بھی اگر تفتیشی ایجنسی کو لگے کہ کوئی بے گناہ پھنس گیا ہے یا اصل ملزم باہر ہے، تو وہ تفتیش جاری رکھ سکتی ہے۔

عدالتِ عالیہ (High Court)
سپریم کورٹ جب کسی ٹرائل کو جلد مکمل کرنے کا حکم دیتی ہے، تو اس کے لیے مخصوص وقت کا تعین کیس کی نوعیت اور عدالتی حکم پر منحصر ہوتا ہے۔ تاہم، اس حوالے سے عمومی قانونی اصول اور اہم فیصلوں کی تفصیل درج ذیل ہے:
1. ٹرائل مکمل کرنے کی مدت
عام طور پر جب ہائی کورٹ ٹرائل کورٹ کو ہدایت جاری کرتی ہے، تو وہ درج ذیل میں سے کوئی ایک مدت مقرر کرتی ہے:
3 ماہ (90 دن): زیادہ تر سنگین مقدمات میں عدالت 3 ماہ کے اندر ٹرائل مکمل کرنے کا حکم دیتی ہے۔
6 ماہ: پیچیدہ مقدمات میں جہاں گواہان کی تعداد زیادہ ہو، 6 ماہ کا وقت دیا جاتا ہے۔
روزانہ کی بنیاد پر سماعت (Day-to-Day Basis): اگر کیس بہت پرانا ہو یا ملزم کافی عرصے سے جیل میں ہو، تو عدالت روزانہ سماعت کا حکم بھی دے سکتی ہے۔
2. قانونی دفعات (CrPC)
دفعہ 344 CrPC: یہ دفعہ ٹرائل کے التوا (Adjournment) سے متعلق ہے۔ اعلیٰ عدالتیں اکثر اس دفعہ کا حوالہ دیتی ہیں کہ ٹرائل میں بلاوجہ التوا نہ دیا جائے۔
آرٹیکل 10-A (آئینِ پاکستان): یہ ہر شہری کو "فیئر ٹرائل" اور جلد انصاف کا حق دیتا ہے۔
3. اہم عدالتی فیصلے (Judgments)
اعلیٰ عدالتوں نے بارہا ٹرائل کی مدت کے حوالے سے سخت احکامات جاری کیے ہیں:
الف: ٹرائل کی مدت اور ضمانت (2021 SCMR 651 - سپریم کورٹ)
اس فیصلے میں سپریم کورٹ نے قرار دیا کہ اگر ہائی کورٹ نے ٹرائل مکمل کرنے کے لیے کوئی وقت (مثلاً 4 ماہ) مقرر کیا تھا اور ٹرائل اس دوران مکمل نہیں ہوا، تو ملزم ضمانت (Bail) کے لیے دوبارہ رجوع کر سکتا ہے۔ عدالت نے اسے ملزم کے حقوق کی خلاف ورزی قرار دیا۔
ب: روزانہ سماعت کا حکم (PLD 2017 SC 733)
سپریم کورٹ نے ہدایت کی کہ وہ مقدمات جو ہائی کورٹ کی طرف سے "ٹائم باؤنڈ" (Time Bound) کیے گئے ہوں، ان کی سماعت روزانہ کی بنیاد پر ہونی چاہیے اور ٹرائل جج کو بلاوجہ التوا نہیں دینا چاہیے۔
ج: ٹرائل جج کی ذمہ داری (2019 YLR 1242 - لاہور ہائی کورٹ)
لاہور ہائی کورٹ نے واضح کیا کہ اگر ٹرائل کورٹ ہائی کورٹ کے دیے گئے وقت کے اندر فیصلہ نہیں کر پاتی، تو ٹرائل جج کو ہائی کورٹ سے باقاعدہ "وقت میں توسیع" (Extension of Time) کی درخواست کرنی چاہیے، ورنہ اسے عدالتی حکم کی عدولی تصور کیا جا سکتا ہے۔
4. اگر ٹرائل مقررہ وقت پر مکمل نہ ہو تو کیا کریں؟
اگر ہائی کورٹ کے حکم کے باوجود ٹرائل لیٹ ہو رہا ہو، تو آپ کے پاس یہ قانونی راستے موجود ہیں:
درخواست برائے تعمیلِ حکم (Implementation Petition): اسی ہائی کورٹ میں متفرق درخواست دائر کریں جس نے حکم دیا تھا، تاکہ ٹرائل کورٹ سے جواب طلبی کی جائے۔
ضمانت کی نئی بنیاد: اگر ملزم جیل میں ہے، تو وقت گزرنے کو "تازہ گراؤنڈ" (Fresh Ground) بنا کر دوبارہ ضمانت کی درخواست دی جا سکتی ہے۔
توسیع کی مخالفت: اگر استغاثہ (Prosecution) تاخیری حربے استعمال کر رہا ہے، تو عدالت سے ان کے گواہان کا حقِ شہادت ختم کرنے کی استدعا کی جا سکتی ہے۔
قانون میں کوئی ایک فکس مدت نہیں ہے، لیکن ہائی کورٹ کا حکم حتمی ہوتا ہے۔ عموماً 3 سے 6 ماہ کا وقت دیا جاتا ہے۔ اگر اس دوران ٹرائل مکمل نہ ہو، تو ملزم کو ضمانت ملنے کے امکانات بہت بڑھ جاتے ہیں اور ٹرائل جج کو ہائی کورٹ میں جوابدہ ہونا پڑتا ہے۔

06/01/2026

This is so strange rather unsettling about the Facebook algorithm; it has a way of bringing up people linked to past loved ones, forcing connections with a part of your life you’ve already moved on from.

فیس بک ایلگوردم بڑا ہی عجیب و غریب ہے جو لوگ آپ کی زندگی میں پیچھے چھوٹ جاتے ہیں یا جن سے آپ راستے الگ کر لیتے ہیں اب وہ لوگ جن سے جڑے ہوئے ہوتے ہیں یا بات کر رہے ہوتے ہیں حتٰی کہ جس مخصوص وقت پہ وہ ان سے بات کرتے ہیں اسی وقت پر فیس بک ان لوگوں کو آپ کی سجیشن لسٹ میں دکھاتا ہے حالانکہ آپ نہ تو ان لوگوں کو جاننا چاہتے ہیں اور نہ ہی اس بات میں دلچسپی رکھتے ہیں کہ وہ لوگ اب کس کے ساتھ تعلق میں ہیں مگر فیس بک مفت میں آپ کے لیے جاسوسی کرتا ہے اور اگر ایسا مستقل بنیادوں پر ہونے لگے تو تکلیف دہ ہوتا ہے۔ کیونکہ جن لوگوں سے راہیں جدا ہو جائیں وہ اجنبی ہو جاتے ہیں۔

19/08/2025

How to improve appointments process to District Judiciary. Finalising the Bar Council response on district judiciary appointments recommendations. Any comments or additional suggestions? Here is the working draft:

Punjab Bar Council
9 Fane Road, Lahore 54000, Pakistan
Phone: +92 42 99214245 49 | Fax: +92 42 99214250
Email: [email protected]
Ref No: PBC/2025/257
Date: [Insert Date]
To:
Mr. Qasim Aslam Minhas
Focal Person / Research Officer
Law and Justice Commission of Pakistan
Supreme Court Building, Constitution Avenue
Islamabad
Subject: Response to NJPMC Committee Consultation on Disjunct Between Policy Innovations of Various High Courts
Dear Sir,
With reference to your letter No. F.40/Meeting 22/4/RO I/NJPMC dated 5th August, 2025, regarding the formulation of recommendations on judicial policy issues, we appreciate the inclusive approach taken by the National Judicial (Policy Making) Committee (NJPMC).
After consultation with the legal community—including valuable input from our public outreach channels—the Punjab Bar Council respectfully submits the following recommendations for your consideration:
________________________________________
1. Recruitment and Eligibility Criteria
• The current CSS-style examination system for judicial appointments should be modernized to assess legal reasoning and practical experience rather than rote memorization.
• Candidates should demonstrate a credible track record, with a minimum of 50 decided cases, backed by verifiable documentation.
• Eligible candidates should include experienced legal professionals like District Law Officers, who have cleared competitive public service exams and possess field experience.
• For family court positions, preference should be given to married individuals with a minimum of five years of judicial experience, aligning personal maturity with professional duties.
2. Training and Capacity Building
• Judicial training must include modules on forensic science, psychology, and human rights. Such initiatives should be made accessible across the province.
• Newly appointed judges require specialized training in managing workplace stress, making independent decisions, and resisting undue influence.
3. Workload Management and Judgment Quality
• Performance evaluations should prioritize judgment quality—such as appellate affirmation rates—over case volume.
• Caseload limits (e.g., max 50 active cases per judge in civil and family courts) should be imposed to ensure thorough and fair adjudication.
• To discourage “copy-paste” judgments, a performance review mechanism should periodically assess and commend analytical and thoughtful rulings.
• Avoid specific judges being defendant specific cases (LDA, DHA, etc.) as the same is against rule of law and leads to corruption and judges’ capture.
4. Safeguarding Judicial Independence
• Measures should be taken to protect civil judges from frivolous complaints and harassment, while holding persistently underperforming judges accountable via an independent review panel.
• Feedback on judges performance should be obtained from Bar Associations and Bar Councils.
• Judicial independence must be secured through institutional protections against undue external pressures.
5. Transparency and Public Access
• The practice of uploading district court judgments online should be reinstated to bolster transparency and accessibility. The same will also lead to development of caselaw for basic day to day cases which is presently missing as only superior courts cases are reported and those only relate to limited issues.
6. Structural Reform & Promotions
• Consider instituting a “Judicial Services of Pakistan” pathway, allowing entry at the Addl. District & Sessions Judge level via competitive exams open to both practicing lawyers and civil judges. Implement the lawyers quota to the full extent.
• Promotion to higher judiciary should be based on merit, seniority, and demonstrated legal acumen.
7. Overseas Training & Exposure
• While support for overseas judicial training is welcomed, nominations should be equitable, merit-based, and regionally balanced.
________________________________________
These recommendations are presented in the spirit of strengthening judicial efficiency, fairness, and credibility. The Punjab Bar Council remains committed to assisting NJPMC’s reform efforts and is ready to provide further elaboration if needed.
Yours sincerely,
[Signature]

Punjab Bar Council

18/08/2025

AMOUNT OF DIYAT FOR THE YEAR 2025-2026.
TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE GAZETTE OF PAKISTAN, EXTRAORDINARY (PART-II)

GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN
FINANCE DIVISION
(INTERNAL FINANCE WING)

⸻

NOTIFICATION

Islamabad, the 18th August, 2025

S.R.O. __________/2025. In pursuance of sub-section (2) of Section 323 of Pakistan Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860), the Federal Government is pleased to declare Rs. 9,828,670/- (Rupees Nine million eight hundred twenty eight thousand six hundred and seventy only), to be the value of thirty thousand six hundred and thirty (30,630) grams of silver as Diyat for the financial year 2025-2026 for the purpose of sub-section (1) thereof.

⸻

(ANAM NASIR)
Section Officer (IF-III)
Ph: 051-9209568

No.F.8(3)IF.III/91

The Manager,
Printing Corporation of Pakistan Press,
Islamabad.

Copy for information to:
1. The Secretary, Law and Justice Division, Islamabad with the request to circulate the Notification to all Courts/Bar Associations.
2. The Assistant Director, Finance Department, State Bank of Pakistan, Karachi, with reference to their letter No.FD-IDD/127/118(A)-2024 dated June 18, 2025.

11/08/2025

WHAT REMEDY IS AVAILABLE IF THE MAGISTRATE DISAGREES WITH THE CANCELLATION REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE POLICE?

29/07/2025

مطلقہ بیٹی فیملی پنشن کی حقدار ہے۔

Family pension is a daughter’s right under the law. Tying it to marital status entrenches structural inequality and reflects patriarchal assumptions, not constitutional principles.

Under the Rules, whether the daughter is unmarried or divorced, she is entitled to the pension of the deceased civil servant in this case being the father’s family pension. However, the Circular gives a narrow interpretation of Rule 4.10(2)(B)(v)7 and (vi) as it restricts the grant of pension to surviving daughters of pensioners based on their marital status at the time of death of the pensioner. This is contrary to the right prescribed under the Act of 1973 and the Rules which imposes no such condition. In our opinion, the Circular adopts an overly rigid approach making a woman’s entitlement to family pension strictly contingent on whether her status as a widow or divorcee was established prior to or at the exact time of the pensioner’s death.
Even a change in status occurring a single day after the death of the pensioner is treated as a complete bar to family pension. The Circular therefore does not clarify Rule 4.10(2) (A) or (B) but rather it imposes a condition of status at the time of death of the pensioner which is totally beyond the intent of the Act of 1973 and the Rules.

It is settled law that executive clarifications in the form of circulars and administrative directives cannot override, amend or curtail the scope of the statute itself or the rules framed thereunder.
C.P.L.A.616-K/2025
Province of Sindh v. Mst. Sorath Fatima
Mrs. Justice Ayesha A. Malik
10-07-2025.

27/07/2025

MEDICAL BOARD
(LATEST JUDGEMENT)
2017 LHC 1564

ORDER SHEET
LAHORE HIGH COURT LAHORE
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Crl. Misc. No.953-M/2017
Muhammad Rizwan. Vs. The State, etc.
07.04.2017 Mr. M. Khawar Kalim, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Shahzad Saleem Warraich, Advocate for
respondents No. 2 and 3.
Dr. Ghulam Ghazi, CMO, Jinnah Hospital,Lahore.
Mr. Haroon-ur-Rasheed, D.D.P.P alongwith Badar,S.I.

Through the instant petition, the petitioner has called in question the legality of orders dated 26.09.2016 and 16.12.2016 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Sec: 30, Lahore, through which he turned down the request of the petitioner for the constitution of medical board to re-examine the injured Witnesses, as well as of learned ASJ, Lahore, whereby he proceeded to dismiss the revision petition on account of lack of jurisdiction.

2. Briefly stated, the facts which led to the filing of the instant petition are to the effect that the petitioner is an accused in case FIR No.274/16 under sections
302/324/148/149 PPC of Police Station Millat Park, Lahore, which stands registered on the complaint of one Mehmood Ali. According to the facts incorporated therein, it is alleged that the petitioner and his co-accused, while armed with deadly weapons launched a murderous assault on the complainant and the witnesses, which resulted into the death of Noman Ali whereas two
persons namely Shahzada Saleem alias Prince and Kazim received firearm injuries on the different parts of their bodies. In this backdrop, the petitioner approached the Area Magistrate for the medical reexamination of Syed Kazim Hussain and Muhammad Shahzada Saleem. This application was turned down by the learned Area Magistrate vide order dated 26.09.2016. The order of the
learned Area Magistrate was assailed before the learned Additional Secession Judge, Lahore through a revision petition filed under section 435/439-A Cr.P.C. This revision petition was dismissed by the ASJ, Lahore, vide order dated 16.12.2016 as being not maintainable.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the both impugned orders were passed by the respective courts, in mechanical manner without considering the facts and circumstances of the case. It is further added
that Syed Kazim Hussain (respondent No.2) and Muhammad Shahzad Saleem (respondent No. 3)managed to obtain their respective Medico Legal Certificates on the basis of false and fabricated injuries and that too in connivance with the medical officer; that in particular the injury on the neck of Syed Kazim Hussain (respondent No.2) can in no manner be termed as firearm injury; that even the MLC of Muhammad Shahzada Saleem (respondent No.3) is dubious in nature
as the entry wound is with averted margin, whereas its margin should have been inverted; that the purpose of the medical examination is to provide a fair data to the court, who is assigned the task of deciding the case and lastly contended that in case the two injured will not be re-examined, it is likely to cause great prejudice to the case of the petitioner.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents No. 2 and 3 strongly controverted the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the impugned orders passed by both the courts below are in accordance with the law and facts of the case that the instant petition is only
focused at frustrating the process of investigation as well as trial; that even otherwise, no such medical re-examination can be conducted after the lapse of period of twenty days; that the circumstances of the case are so clear that there is no need of the constitution of any medical board for the purposes of re-examination.

5. Arguments heard; record perused.

6. It evinces from the record as well as from the arguments advanced by both the parties that the instant petition is aimed at subjecting the injuries of Syed Kazim and Muhammad Shahzada Saleem, for re-examination through a medical board. According to the story incorporated in the crime report, Syed Kazim received a firearm injury on the back of his neck. The perusal of his MLC shows that the doctor observed two injuries on the back of his neck. Out of these injuries one is an entry wound whereas the other one is an exit. The two wounds are separated by each other hardly by an inch. It further divulges from the MLC that no internal organ of Syed Kazim Hussain (respondent No.2) was damaged. This aspect alone, is sufficient to cast doubt about the genuineness of the opinion, expressed by the Medical Officer, warranting interference of this Court to pass an appropriate order for the re-examination of the injured
witnesses.

7. This Court is not oblivious of the fact that the constitution of the medical board for the purposes of re-examination of a witness is not an order which is to be passed in routine and that too blindly and mechanically.Sometime, such applications are moved to frustrate the process of law or to delay the procedure of investigation and trial. Similarly, at times it is noticed that either due to lack of knowledge or experience or on account of other considerations, the correct medical data is not brought on record. Similarly, this Court is also well
aware of the fact that the evil of self-inflicted and fabricated injuries have also penetrated deep, into the criminal justice system. The Courts, by virtue of their
very purpose of constitution, are obliged to be at their toes, while dealing with such like cases. Due to these reasons, Syed Kazim Hussain who was in attendance before the Court, was also tentatively examined. Though, there are two wounds on the back of his neck, each separated from other hardly by a single inch. I have also taken the pain to go through the MLC issued in support
of injuries on the body of Syed Kazim Hussain. It evinces that certain columns, which were of immense importance were left blank. In this regard, the column meant for the date of discharge of the patient can be seen. The perusal
of the MLC further gives a reflection that the injury caused no damage to any internal organ in the neck. Such aspects reflect that the possibility of the injury not being through a firearm, cannot be ruled out.

8. The medico legal aspect of a criminal case is the most sensitive task, assigned to a medical officer. On the report prepared by a doctor comprising upon an incorrect data an innocent person can be hanged and similarly a guilty person can escape from the gallows. At the time of the final decision, the court is completely dependent on the medical data, furnished by a doctor. In the absence of exceptional circumstances, much weight is attached to the evidence of the doctor. The doctor is normally considered to be a witness, not of a party but of truth. A doctor, by bringing on record a fair medical data, in fact helps the court in administering justice and contributes his humble bit towards providing justice to the aggrieved segment of the society. It will not be wrong to say that an expert witness is like a bridge on the road which leads to the ultimate destination of the sacred and sensitive functions of administration of Justice.
9. I have also carefully, attended to the objection raised by the learned counsel for respondents No. 2 and 3, so far as it relates with the time period stipulated for the re-examination of the injured. According to the record, the petitioner approached the learned Area Magistrate through an order dated 29.07.2016 which is a reflection of the fact that he was vigilant and prompt in raising objection regarding the injuries being fabricated. Admittedly, it is enunciated in the notification No. SO(H&D) 6-1/90 issued by Government of the Punjab,
Health Department dated 12.02.1990 that an order for the medical re-examination may be passed within three weeks of the first examination. However, the perusal of a subsequent notification No. SO(H&D) 6-/90 dated
08.02.1992 shows that even medical re-examination orders can be passed beyond the period of three weeks. For ready reference, both the notifications are being reproduced below: -

1st Notification

No. SO(H&D) 6-1/90
GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB
HEALTH DEPARTMENT
Dated the 12th February, 1990
To
The All District Magistrates
in the Punjab.
Subject: CONSTITUTION OF SPECIAL MEDICAL
BOARD FOR RE-EXAMINATION/RE-
POSTMORTEM.
Government has been constituting various medical boards for 2nd opinion from time to time. It has been noticed that this practice not only consumes lengthy procedures but also leads to unnecessary litigation. It has, therefore, been decided to constitute the following permanent District Board for re-examination/re-postmortem for

2nd medical opinion. The judicial officers may be advised to approach the relevant Boards whenever required. However, such orders may be passed within three weeks of the first examination. The opinion of the respective
Boards shall be final. The Board shall only examine such cases on the judicial orders of the District Magistrate.DISTRICT LEVEL. Medical Superintendent, D.H.Q. Hospital (concerned District). Chairman
(2). District Health Officer (concerned District) Member
(3). Surgeon (D.H.Q) (concerned District)Member
FOR LAHORE
Surgeon Medico-Legal Punjab Chairman
Senior Assistant Professor of Forensic Medicine, King Edward
Medical College, Lahore. Member
District Health Officer, Lahore. Member
(Sd.)
Dr. Abdul Raouf,
Section Officer
(H&D)

For secretary

2nd Notification:
No. SO(H&D) 6-/90
GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB
HEALTH DEPARTMENT
Dated the 8
th February, 1992
To
The All District Magistrates in the Punjab.
Subject: CONSTITUTION OF SPECIAL MEDICAL
BOARD FOR RE-EXAMINATION/RE-POSTMORTEM.
“In continuation to this department letter of even number dated 12-2-1990 on the above subject.
It is clarified that if the re-examination orders have been passed by the District Magistrate concerned as a Judicial Officer after three weeks of first examination they will supersede instruction
issued by Health Department”.
(Sd.)
Section Officer (H&D)
For secretary

It divulges from the two notifications, mentioned above that there is no absolute bar or restriction for the constitution of medical board for the purposes of medical re-examination of an injured person.

11. It is important to mention here that the Government of
Punjab, through a Gazette Notification No. SO(H&D)5-
5/2002 dated 05.02.2003 further amended the procedure for
revamping of medico legal work in Punjab and laid down a
three tier structure. It would be appropriate to reproduce the
relevant Gazette Notification which is as under: -
Gazette of Punjab, Part I,

5th February, 2003
No. SO(H&D) 5-5/2002, dated 05.02.2003.--- Pursuant to the orders of the Governor following amendments in procedure are hereby ordered for revamping of medico legal work in Punjab with immediate effect.
1. A “Three Tier Structure” for the conduction of medico legal work has been established.

(a). FIRST TIER
The initial medico legal examination shall be carried out by the Medical Officers/Women Medical Officers at the Rural Health Centres, Tehsil
Headquarters Hospitals, District Headquarters Hospitals and at Teaching Hospitals.
(b). SECOND TIER
The District Standing Medical Boards, comprising the following shall act as First Appellate Authority in all the 34 District of Punjab:Medical Superintendent, DHQ Hospital Chairman District Officer Health Member Surgeon Member
These Boards will conduct re-examination if the decision of the first medico legal examiner is challenged and also for examination of alleged cases
of police torture. For District Lahore District Standing Medical Board will be established at Government Mian Muhammad Munshi, DHQ, Hospital-I.
(C) THIRD TIER
The role of Surgeon medico legal, the Punjab shall only be Appellate and Supervisory. He shall be the Chairman of Provincial Standing Medical Board,
which shall be the final Appellate Authority against the decisions of District Standing Medical Boards. Other members of the Provincial Standing Medical
Board (PSMB) will be the Associate/Assistant Professor Forensic Medicine of the Regional Medical College and the Medical Superintendent of one of the attached Teaching Hospital. The Board can co-opt any other member when required.

12. I have also perused the report submitted on behalf of Deputy Superintendent of Police, Organized Crime (CIA) City Division, Lahore, who is a part of the process of the investigation of the instant case. It divulges from
his report that even it is desired by the police department,for the purposes of conclusion of fair investigation that the two injured namely Syed Kazim Hussain and Shahzad Saleem-ue-Rehman alias Prince be re-examined. An in-
depth scrutiny of his report reveals that he requested that the medical re-examination be done through Provincial Medical Board, instead of District Standing Board. I deem it appropriate to clarify the difference between the
District Standing Medical Board and the Provincial Standing Medical Board. These two terms are the creation of the Gazette Notification No. SO(H&D)5-
5/2002 dated 05.02.2003 (mentioned supra). According to the forgoing notification, the medical examination is categorized at three levels. The initial or first level of medico legal examination is to be carried out by the medical officer at Rural Health Centres (RHC), Tehsil Headquarters Hospital (THQ) or at District Headquarters Hospital (DHQ). The opinion expressed at first level can be challenged before the District Standing Medical Boards, which is described as second tier/level. The opinion of the District Medical Board can be
challenged before the Provincial Standing Medical Board in its appellate or supervisory jurisdiction, described as third or ultimate tier/level. In this backdrop,I am of the view that instead of referring the matter to the third tier i.e. the Provincial Standing Medical Board, the matter may be placed before the second tier/level i.e. District Standing Medical Board. Such an approach is
adopted keeping in view the provision of the Article 10-A of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan which makes the “due process” the fundamental right of every subject of the State.

13. For what has been discussed above, while setting aside the impugned orders dated 26.09.2016 and 16.12.2016, the instant petition is allowed and resultantly the Medical Superintendent, Mian Munshi Hospital, DHQ Lahore is directed to constitute a medical board comprising upon Senior Members having requisite expertise on the subject and to re-examine, both the injured witnesses namely Shahzad Saleem alias Prince and Syed Kazim Hussain, on or before 15th of May, 2017. It is expected that while examining the two injured
witnesses, they will offer their opinion strictly in accordance with the medical jurisprudence relating to human anatomy.

(Ch. Abdul Aziz
Judge.