Legal Principle & Question Decided

Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Sindh High Court, officially reported as 2024 SHC 603. In this matter between Criminal Miscelleneous 1262/2024 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi - SHAHID MEHMOOD QURESHI THR ATTORNEY IRFAN ABBASI (Applicant) and the Respondent, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.

Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.

Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

COURT: Sindh High Court CASE NO: Criminal Miscelleneous 1262/2024 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Karachi CITATION: 2025 SHC KHI 599 PARTIES: SHAHID MEHMOOD QURESHI THR ATTORNEY IRFAN ABBASI (Applicant) ORDER DATE: 16-JAN-25 BENCH: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Iqbal Kalhoro, Senior Puisne Judge(Author) A.F.R: Yes ------------------------------------------------------------ 1

ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH, KARACHI. Cr. Misc. Application No.1262 of 2024 (Shahid Mehmood Qureshi vs. Raheel Haroon & others)

Date Order with signature of Judge Priority cases 1. For orders on MA No.530/2025 2. For hg. of case 3. For hg. of MA No.17232/2024

16.01.2025. Mr. Muhammad Awais Shaikh advocate for applicant Mr. Mir Muhammad, advocate for respondents Mr. Gul Faraz Khatak, DAG

O R D E R

MUHAMMAD IQBAL KALHORO J: Applicant has impugned an order dated 27.11.2024 passed in Criminal Revision Application No.129/2024 by learned District & Sessions Judge (South), Karachi, whereby applicant has been made accused in Direct Complaint No.4876/2024 filed by respondent No.1, who is by professional advocate.

2. This direct complaint was filed against a number of accused for committing offence s u/s 11, 20 and 24 of the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 (PECA). This complaint after a preliminary inquiry was admitted vide order dated 02.10.2024 against accused Muhammad Yasir, Shahid Qadri and Muhammad Abdullah, whereas, remaining accused, namely, Umer Ikram, Raja Naveed, Bilal Talib and Rana Ahsan were let off by the Court after holding preliminary enquiry on the basis of lack of evidence. This order was challenged by respondent No.1 in r evision application with the request that against applicant there was sufficient material, hence, he shall also be made an accused in the case, which by impugned order was allowed.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused material available on record. It is an admitted position that applicant was neither cited as accused by complainant in direct complaint, nor in any para of the direct complaint any incriminating material making him accused under the relevant provision s of PECA has been suggested. Learned Revisional Court has been swayed purportedly by a report of inquiry in which it was found that accused Shahid Qadir had held a press conference issuing threats to the complainant that he should stop working against applicant Shahid Mahmood Qureshi.

2

4. Since name of the applicant was taken by co-accused Shahid Qadri in the press conference , he was considered as an accused in the case. What the Revisional Court did not notice was the fact that n either the applicant was present in the alleged press conference, nor there is any record that he had issued any threats on any social media platform directly or indirectly against the complainant, nor any evidence that the said press conference was held at his initiative. Hence, in absence of his name being cited by the complainant in direct complaint as accused or in statements recorded in preliminary enquiry and absence of incriminating material against him, being arraigned as accused by the Revisional Court in the case is not justified.

5. Therefore, this order on the face of it is not sustainable in law and is accordingly set aside. However, complainant is at liberty , if any material comes on record against the applicant in the trial , to move a fresh application before the trial Court, whic h however if filed, would be subject to a decision in accordance with law after hearing both the parties.

The Cr. Miscellaneous Application stands disposed of in above terms along listed applications.

J U D G E Rafiq/P.A

Related Legal Research & Directories

• Browse all judgments from Sindh High Court
• Search Pakistani statutes: Constitution of Pakistan 1973, PPC, CrPC, CPC & Family Laws
• Analyze this case with Al Wakeelo AI Legal Assistant