Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: Raja Shahid Ahmed VS Respondent: State Honorable Justice Sadiq Mahmud Khurram Amjad Pervaiz
CITATION: 2026 YLR 1476 CASE: 2026L4066 TITLE: Raja Shahid Ahmed VS State Honorable Justice Sadiq Mahmud Khurram Amjad Pervaiz COURT: LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE YEAR: 2026 JOURNAL: YLR ============================================================
2002 Y L R 2026 Y L R 1476 [Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench)] Before Sadiq Mahmud Khurram, J Raja Shahid Ahmed ---Appellant Versus The State and another---Respondents Criminal Appeals Nos. 525, 526, 520 and 534 of 2024, decided on 25th February, 2025. (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 420, 468, 471 & 409---Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5---Cheating, forgery, misconduct and criminal breach of trust---Appreciation of evidence---Analysis of mutations through laboratory---Inconsequential---Accused were charged that they, in connivance with the Revenue Department, got transferred the land of the complainant in their names---Appellants entered their names as vendees in the disputed mutations, with the active connivance of the other appellants, despite the fact that neither the vendor (since deceased) had sold any land to the appellants nor the said appellants had any title over the said land---At the very outset, it had been noticed that both the disputed mutations were sent to the Forensic Science Agency for analysis---According to the report of the Forensic Science Agency, it could not be determined that the names of the appellants had been inserted subsequently---Complainant of the case also admitted during cross-examination that he had not assailed the report of the Forensic Science Agency---The very report of the Forensic Science Agency smashed the whole foundation of the prosecution case against the accused/appellants when it was determined that the names of the appellants had not been inserted subsequently in the disputed mutations, which was the sole allegation levelled by the complainant of the case against the appellants---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in the circumstances. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 420, 468, 471 & 409---Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5---Cheating, forgery, misconduct and criminal breach of trust---Appreciation of evidence---Inordinate delay in challenging the mutations---Adverse presumption---Accused were charged that they, in connivance with the Revenue Department, got transferred the land of the complainant in their names---Prosecution case was that the vendor of the land which was sold through the disputed mutations was MA ; however, according to the Death Certificate, the said MA died on 01.04.2021, and it was only after the death of the said vendor that the complainant of the case submitted the application for the registration of the case on 17.11.2021---Complainant of the case waited for the death of the vendor before he challenged the disputed mutations, and that too only to the extent that the names of the appellants had been inserted subsequently in the disputed mutations---What precluded the complainant from assailing the addition of the names of the appellants in the disputed mutations had not been explained ---It was admitted by the complainant of the case that on 15.03.2017 he had mutated his land in the same Mauza; however, he still waited till the death of the vendor to assail the disputed mutations---In this case, the very act of the complainant of not challenging the disputed mutations during the lifetime of the vendor itself raised the presumption that, had the disputed mutations been assailed with regard to the names of the appellants being inserted subsequently in the lifetime of the vendor, then the said vendor would not have supported the complainant in his claim---During the course of the investigation and trial, it was also proved that the vendor had sold his land to the complainant and the appellants, and the witnesses of the said sale transaction also joined the investigation of the case and made statements in favour of the appellants that the said appellants were also the purchasers of the land of the vendor---Not only the fact that the sale of land through the disputed mutations was verified by the witnesses, but the vendor of the said land also appeared before the concerned Revenue Officer on 06.07.2015 and himself verified the said disputed mutations---Similarly, the Patwari also admitted the fact that the land was sold by the deceased vendor to the appellants---Naib Tehsildar also admitted during cross-examination that the names of the appellants were mentioned in the relevant column of the disputed mutations as vendees---In that manner, it was admitted by the various prosecution witnesses themselves that there was no evidence available on record that the names of the appellants were added in the disputed mutations subsequently---It was an admitted fact that the disputed mutations had not been cancelled to date---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in the circumstances. (c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 420, 468, 471 & 409---Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5---Cheating, forgery, misconduct and criminal breach of trust---Appreciation of evidence---Contradictions in the statement of the complainant---Consequential--Accused were charged that they, in connivance with the Revenue Department, got transferred the land of the complainant in their names---Fact of the prosecution case was that the complainant made variant claims regarding the land which was mutated through the disputed mutations ---In his statement before the Trial Court, the complainant claimed that the land which was mutated through the disputed mutations was actually sold by him to the deceased vendor in the year 2003 in lieu of an agreement; however, when the said agreement failed, the deceased vendor transferred the said land back to the complainant---During the course of the investigation as well as the trial, no agreement as executed between the deceased vendor and the complainant was produced---It was apparent that during the course of the trial, the complainant made contradictory claims with regard to the consideration of the transfer of the land transferred through the disputed mutations and also could not prove that he was the sole buyer of the land mutated through the disputed mutations---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in the circumstances. (d) Criminal trial--- ----Benefit of doubt---Conviction---Conjectures and probabilities---Scope---Finding of guilt against an accused person cannot be based merely on the high probabilities that may be inferred from the evidence in a given case---Finding as regards the guilt of the accused should rest surely and firmly on the evidence produced in the case and the plain inferences of guilt that may irresistibly be drawn from that evidence---Mere conjectures and probabilities cannot take the place of proof. (e) Criminal trial--- ----Benefit of doubt---Principle---If only a single circumstance creating reasonable doubt in the mind of a prudent person is available, then such benefit is to be extended to an accused not as a matter of concession but as of right. Muhammad Mansha v. The State 2018 SCMR 772 and Najaf Ali Shah v. The State 2021 SCMR 736
rel. Amjad Pervaiz for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 525 of 2024). Taimoor Aslam Khan for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 526 of 2024). Muhammad Asim for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 520 of 2024). Asad Abbasi for Appellant (in Criminal Appeal No. 534 of 2024). Sohail Iqbal, District Public Prosecutor for the State. Talat Mahmood Zaidi for the Complainant. Date of hearing: 25th February, 2025. Judgment Sadiq Mahmud Khurram, J .--- Raja Shahid Ahmad son of Bashir Ahmad, Haq Nawaz Abbasi son of Khuda Daad Khan, Aurangzeb son of Umar Khan and Malik Muhammad Safdar son of Khan Bahadur (convicts) were tried by the learned Sessions Judge/Special Judge Anti-Corruption, Rawalpindi Division, Rawalpindi, in case FIR No.13 of 2022 dated 18.05.2022 registered in respect of offences under sections 409, 420, 468 and 471 P.P.C. and under section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 (Act No.II of 1947) at Police Station Anti-Corruption Establishment, Rawalpindi. The learned trial court vide judgment dated 13.06.2024 convicted Raja Shahid Ahmad son of Bashir Ahmad, Haq Nawaz Abbasi son of Khuda Daad Khan, Aurangzeb son of Umar Khan and Malik Muhammad Safdar son of Khan Bahadur (convicts) and sentenced them as infra:- Raja Shahid Ahmad son of Bashir Ahmad:- i) Rigorous imprisonment of seven years under section 471 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 500,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months. ii) Rigorous imprisonment of seven years under section 468 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 500,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months. iii) Rigorous imprisonment of three years under section 420 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 200,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months Haq Nawaz Abbasi son of Khuda Daad Khan:- i) Rigorous imprisonment of seven years under section 471 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 500,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months. ii) Rigorous imprisonment of seven years under section 468 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 500,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months. iii) Rigorous imprisonment of three years under section 420 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 200,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months Aurangzeb son of Umar Khan:- i) Rigorous imprisonment of seven years under section 409 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 500,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months. ii) Rigorous imprisonment of seven years under section 471 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 500,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months. iii) Rigorous imprisonment of seven years under section 468 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 500,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months. iv) Rigorous imprisonment of three years under section 420 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 200,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months v) Rigorous imprisonment of seven years under section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 (Act No.II of 1947). Malik Muhammad Safdar son of Khan Bahadur:- i) Rigorous imprisonment of seven years under section 409 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 500,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months. ii) Rigorous imprisonment of seven years under section 471 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 500,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months. iii) Rigorous imprisonment of seven years under section 468 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 500,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months. iv) Rigorous imprisonment of three years under section 420 Pakistan Penal Code,1860 and directed to pay fine of Rs. 200,000/-, and in case of default of payment of fine the convict was directed to further undergo simple Imprisonment of six months v) Rigorous imprisonment of seven years under section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 (Act No.II of 1947). The convicts were, however, extended the benefit available under section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 by the learned trial court. All the sentences awarded to the appellants were ordered to run concurrently by the learned trial court. 2. Feeling aggrieved, Raja Shahid Ahmad son of Bashir Ahmad, lodged the instant Criminal Appeal No.525 of 2024 assailing his conviction and sentences. Feeling aggrieved, Haq Nawaz Abbasi son of Khuda Daad Khan (convict) lodged the instant Criminal Appeal No.526 of 2024 assailing his conviction and sentences. Feeling aggrieved, Aurangzeb son of Umar Khan (convict) lodged the instant Criminal Appeal No.520 of 2024 assailing his conviction and sentences. Feeling aggrieved, Malik Muhammad Safdar son of Khan Bahadur (convict) lodged the instant Criminal Appeal No.534 of 2024 assailing his conviction and sentences. I intend to decide the Criminal Appeal No.525 of 2024, the Criminal Appeal No.526 of 2024, the Criminal Appeal No.520 of 2024 and the Criminal Appeal No.534 of 2024 through this single judgment. 3. The brief facts of the prosecution case, as stated by the complainant of the case in his statement before the learned trial court are as under:- I have purchased a lot of piece of land at Mauza Rajer. I got enter number of two Mutations Nos.5442 and 5442/1 bearing land measuring 388-K 13-M and 2142-K 10-M respectively in my favor and I deposited the official fee regarding the purchasing of land in the above said Mutations. I and my family transferred the above said land to Haji Muhammad Azram and his brother Guftar in the year 2003. Since there was some commitment between me and Muhammad Azram, due to non-fulfillment of the obligations the above said land was again transferred to me through the Mutations Nos.5442 and 5442/1. Thereafter, I went to abroad after my arrival in Pakistan, I inquired record of my said Mutations in Revenue Department and to utter my disbelief that the said land was transferred in my name along with three accused persons namely accused Muhammad Almas Abbasi, accused Haq Nawaz Abbasi and accused Raja Shahid. The transfer of land in the name of accused Almas Abbasi, accused Haq Nawaz Abbasi and Raja Shahid accused person in the result of their connivance with the concerned Revenue Department. In above said Mutations the word "Mazkoor" was written instead of "Mazkooraan" which proved that I was the sole owner of the land in the above said Mutations. Almas Abbasi accused was my commissioned agent. (objected by learned defense counsel Mr. Ansar Nawaz Mirza the word commission is objectionable cannot be treated as commissioned agent). Almas Abbasi accused is also involved a number of fraud cases. These cases are pertained to Tehsil Gujjar Khan, and decided in my favor and against accused Almas Abbasi and others. The disputed property comprising of said Mutations is worth of more than three billions rupees. I moved an application to the DG Anti-Corruption Establishment Lahore to take the cognizance of the matter in issue. The application Exh.P.J which bearing my signatures and I owned my signature Exh.P.J/1. The accused persons be dealt accordingly, I have been lost a huge amount of loss. The aforesaid accused persons have alienated the some piece of land out of the disputed land to other persons. 4. After the formal investigation of the case report under section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 was submitted before the learned trial court, wherein the accused were sent to face trial. The learned trial court framed the charge against the accused on 23.01.2023, to which the accused pleaded not guilty, claimed trial and the learned trial court proceeded to examine the prosecution witnesses. 5. The prosecution in order to prove its case got recorded statements of as many as eleven
witnesses recorded. Muhammad Asad, Constable (PW-1) stated that on 18.05.2022, he recorded the formal FIR (Exh.PA). Muhammad Zohaib Sarwar, Senior Auditor (PW-2) stated that on 15.06.2022, he issued the letter (Exh.PB/1-2). Israr Ul Haq Constable (PW-3) stated that on 03.06.2022, he received the reports of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore and handed them over to the Investigating Officer of the case and on 07.07.2022, he received the Death Certificate (P-4/1-4) of Haji Muhammad Azram and produced the same before the Investigating Officer of the case. Muhammad Shabbir, Girdawar (PW-4) stated that on 15.06.2006, he received the Mutation No. 5442/1 (P-1/1-6). Saleem Raza, Naib Tehsildar (PW-5) stated that on 28.06.2018, he registered the Mutation No. 5442/1 (P-1/1-6). Nasir Qureshi, Record Keeper (PW-6) stated that on 17.06.2022, he produced the Pert Sarkar pertaining to the Mutation No. 5442/1 (P-1/1-6) before the Investigating Officer of the case. Farhat Mahmood, Patwari (PW-7) stated that on 10.06.2022, he joined the investigation of the case and produced the copies of the Mutation No. 5442/1 and the Mutation No. 5442 and other documents (Exh.PG/1-57) before the Investigating Officer of the case. Ghulam Mujtaba, Naib Tehsildar (Retired) (PW-11) stated that he had not signed the Mutation No. 5442/1 and the Mutation No. 5442. Zulfiqar Muhammad Bazeed, Circle Officer (PW-8) investigated the case from 18.05.2022 till 05.10.2022 and detailed the facts discovered during the investigation of the case in his statement before the learned trial court. 6. On 14.05.2024, the learned Deputy District Public Prosecutor closed the prosecution evidence after tendering in evidence the reports of Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore (Exh.PK, Exh.PL and Exh.PM) and certified copies of other documents related to the litigation between the parties (Exh.PN to Exh.PX). 7. After the closure of prosecution evidence, the learned trial court examined the appellants namely Raja Shahid Ahmad son of Bashir Ahmad, Haq Nawaz Abbasi son of Khuda Daad Khan, Aurangzeb son of Umar Khan and Malik Muhammad Safdar son of Khan Bahadu, under section 342 Cr.P.C. and in answer to the question why this case against you and why the P.W.s have deposed against you, they stated that they had been falsely involved in the case and were innocent. The appellants opted not to get themselves examined under section 340(2) Cr.P.C however the appellants namely Malik Muhammad Safdar and Aurangzeb produced the document (Exh.DG) as evidence in their defence, whereas the appellants namely Haq Nawaz Abbasi and Raja Shahid Ahmad produced the document (Exh.DH) as evidence in their defence. 8. At the conclusion of the trial, the learned Sessions Judge/ Special Judge Anti-Corruption, Rawalpindi Division, Rawalpindi, convicted and sentenced the appellants as referred to above. 9. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants precisely was that the whole case was invented and untrue and that the prosecution remained unable to prove the facts in issue and did not produce any unimpeachable, admissible and relevant evidence. Learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that the appellants were quite innocent and had nothing to do with the alleged crimes. They further submitted that the prosecution had miserably failed to prove the charge against the appellants beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt and the learned trial court, while passing the impugned judgment of the appellants conviction, had erred in law and facts of the case, which warranted interference by this Court. 10. On the other hand, the learned District Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the complainant contended that the prosecution had proved its case beyond shadow of doubt by producing independent witnesses. The learned District Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the complainant further submitted that the appellants were involved in the commission of the crimes for which they had been convicted and that the impugned judgment entailing the convictions and sentences of the appellants did not warrant interference by this Court. Lastly, the learned District Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the complainant prayed for the rejection of the appeals. 11. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the learned District Public Prosecutor, the learned counsel for the complainant and with their assistance, perused the record and evidence recorded during the trial. 12. It is trite that in a civil action, a party has to prove his case on the test of preponderance of probability but in a case entailing criminal liability, the requirement is to prove the charges beyond the shadow of doubt. The decision of a court in a suit does not automatically act as proof of guilt of the accused in a criminal matter, without leading any evidence to prove the facts in issue in the case being tried by the learned trial court. The law is absolutely clear that the matter is to be decided in the light of the evidence that may be adduced before the learned trial court and its decision must rest on such evidence. The crux of the case of the prosecution against the appellants is that the appellants namely Raja Shahid Ahmad and Haq Nawaz Abbasi got entered their names as vendees in the Mutation No. 5442/1 and Mutation No. 5442, with the active connivance of the appellants namely Aurangzeb and Malik Muhammad Safdar, despite the fact that neither Haji Muhammad Azram (since dead), had sold any land to the appellants namely Raja Shahid Ahmad and Haq Nawaz Abbasi nor the said appellants namely Raja Shahid Ahmad and Haq Nawaz Abbasi had any title over the said land. At the very outset it has been noticed that both mutations i.e. the Mutation No. 5442/1 and Mutation No. 5442 were sent to the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore for analysis and according to the report of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore (Exh.PK also exhibited as Exh.PC/1-13), it could not be determined that the names of the appellants namely Raja Shahid Ahmad and Haq Nawaz Abbasi had been inserted subsequently. The relevant portion of the report of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore (Exh.PK also exhibited as Exh.PC/1-13) reads as under:- Furthermore, Zulfiqar Muhammad Bazeed, CO (PW-8), the Investigating Officer of the case, also admitted during cross-examination that according to the report of the Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore (Exh.PK also exhibited as Exh.PC/1-13), it was determined that the names of the appellants namely Raja Shahid Ahmad and Haq Nawaz Abbasi had not been inserted subsequently. During cross-examination, Zulfiqar Muhammad Bazeed, CO (PW-8), the Investigating Officer of the case, admitted as under:- During investigation the reference was sent to PFSA only pertaining to Column No.7 of Mutation No.5442/1 regarding its "Pert Patwar and Pert Sarkar" for verification. It is correct that as per report of PFSA Exh.PC/6 does not disclose any subsequent insertion of alleged three persons in Column No.7 as mentioned . This fact also came in report PFSA Exh.PC/6 that names of alleged three persons have been written using similar kind of ink/writing instrument (pen). It is correct that during inquiry/investigation original Mutation No.5442/1 (PF/1-6) "Pert Sarkar" was sent to PFSA for forensic report in respect to "whether the names of alleged three persons in column No.7 of Mutation are inserted subsequently or not" and "whether the names of all alleged three persons in Column No.7 of Mutation were written with same instrument (Pen) and Ink or not". Similarly, I also sent the original "Pert Patwar" of Mutation No.5442/1 to PFSA for forensic report in respect to "whether the names of alleged three persons in column No.7 of Mutation are inserted subsequently or not" and "whether the names of all alleged three persons in Column No.7 of Mutation were written with same instrument (Pen) and Ink or not".It is correct that as per report of PFSA Exh PC/1-13 in respect to Pert Patwar and Pert Sarkar of Mutation No.5442/1 no abnormality was found. (emphasis supplied) Nisar Ahmad Afzal (PW-10), the complainant of the case also admitted during cross-examination that he had not assailed the report of Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore and stated as under:- It is correct that Mutation No.5442/1 was sent by Investigating Officer for forensic analysis to PFSL. It is correct that the report was submitted to the I.O by the PFSL. I have not challenged the report of PFSL regarding Mutation No.5442/1. As mentioned above,the sole allegation levelled by the complainant of the case against the appellants was that the appellants namely Raja Shahid Ahmad and Haq Nawaz Abbasi got entered their names as vendees in the Mutation No. 5442/1 and Mutation No. 5442, with the active connivance of the appellants namely Aurangzeb…
Read the unabridged text and precedent citation network on Al Wakeelo Legal Research Platform.