Tehsil Bar Association Shakar Garh

24/12/2025

Election2026-27

09/08/2025

*2025 LHC 5162*

LAHORE HIGH COURT

JUSTICE ABHAR GUL

جسٹس عنبر گُل صاحبہ کی جانب سے ایک بہترین فیصلہ ہے جسکی جتنی تعریف کی جائے کم ہے۔

جسٹس صاحبہ نے یہ قانونی نقطہ اور اصول طے کر دیا ہے کہ جب کسی شخص کو عدالت کی جانب سے بری کر دیا جائے اور یہ فیصلہ حتمی شکل اختیار کر چکا ہو یعنی بندہ مجسٹریٹ کورٹ سے یا سیشن کورٹ سے بری ہوا اور اسکے خلاف کوئی نظر ثانی میں نہیں کیا تو اس کے بعد سرکاری حکام خصوصی طور پر پنجاب پولیس کی جانب سے اس شخص کو کسی بھی مجرمانہ الزام کے ساتھ جوڑنا یعنی اس کے کریکٹر سرٹیفکیٹ پر ایف آئی آر کا حوالہ دینا یا سابقہ مقدمات کا حوالہ دینا نہ صرف اس بریت کے فیصلے کو کمزور کرتا ہے بلکہ انصاف، عزت نفس اور معصومیت کے اصولوں کی بھی سنگین خلاف ورزی ہے۔

لہٰذا، درخواست گزار اس بات کا حقدار ہے کہ اُسے ایسا پولیس کریکٹر سرٹیفکیٹ جاری کیا جائے جو اس کی بریت اور کسی بھی قسم کی موجودہ مجرمانہ ذمہ داری کے نہ ہونے کی مکمل طور پر عکاسی کرے۔ یعنی کریکٹر سرٹیفکیٹ پر کچھ بھی سابقہ مقدمہ کے متعلق درج نہ ہو جس میں وہ بری ہو چکا ہو بلکہ ایسا ہی کریکٹر سرٹیفکیٹ ہو جیسے اس پر کبھی مقدمہ تھا ہی نہیں۔

اِسکے ساتھ ہی جسٹس صاحبہ نے فیصلہ میں واضح لکھا کہ سیکریٹری داخلہ، حکومتِ پنجاب کو ہدایت کی جاتی ہے کہ وہ درخواست گزار کے حق میں ایسا پولیس کریکٹر سرٹیفکیٹ جاری کرنے کو یقینی بنائیں جو اس کے موجودہ قانونی موقف کو درست طور پر ظاہر کرے اور کسی بھی سابقہ مقدمہ کی معلومات درج نہ ہو یعنی یہ سرٹیفکیٹ کسی بھی ایف آئی آر کا کوئی حوالہ یا ذکر اپنے اندر شامل نہیں رکھے گا۔ جسٹس صاحبہ نے ساتھ ہی اپنے حُکم کی ایک نقل انسپکٹر جنرل پنجاب پولیس اور چیف سیکریٹری پنجاب کو بھجوا دی ہے تاکہ مذکورہ بالا ہدایات اور مشاہدات کی روشنی میں اس پر سختی سے عمل درآمد کو یقینی بنایا جا سکے۔

*Once a person has been acquitted and the order has attained finality, any act by public authorities that continues to associate that individual with a criminal allegation undermines not only the acquittal itself but also the foundational principles of fairness, dignity, and presumption of innocence. Therefore, the petitioner is entitled to a Police Character Certificate that reflects his acquittal and the absence of any subsisting criminal liability. The Home Secretary, Government of the Punjab is directed to ensure the issuance of a Police Character Certificate in favour of the petitioner, which accurately reflects his present legal status and the said certificate shall exclude and omit any reference whatsoever to FIR. A Copy of this order be transmitted to the Inspector General of Police Punjab and the Chief Secretary Punjab, to ensure its strict implementation in light of the directions and observations given above.*

01/08/2025

18/06/2025

08/09/2024

2024 CLC 922

--O. VII, R. 11---Application under O. VII, R. 11, C.P.C for rejection of plaint---Objective---Court, powers and duties of--- Inherent jurisdiction---If a party who approaches the Court, with mala fide intention by concealing material facts, which if brought before the Court, the plaintiff would have been out of Court for having no cause of action and also in a situation here defendants brought any such fact in the notice of the Court, the same can also be judiciously pondered upon while deciding an application under O. VII, R. 11, C.P.C., because a plaintiff should not be allowed to grind the other party into false and frivolous litigation - Basic objective and aim of O. VII. R.11, C.P.C., is that an incompetent suit should be laid to rest at its inception so that no further time is allowed to be wasted over what is bound to collapse - - Suit may be specifically barred by law and in such an event matter would come under the terms of clause (d) of R.11, O. VII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, but even in a case where a suit is not permitted by necessary implication of law in the sense that a positive prohibition can be spelt out of legal provisions, the Court has got an inherent jurisdiction to reject the plaint at any stage of trial and in such a situation formalities should be avoided to reject it, thus, O.VII, R. 11, C.P.C., is not exhaustive---Court in exercise of inherent jurisdiction can nip frivolous litigation in the bud---It is the duty of the Court to thoroughly examine the plaint at the very inception so that the parties could be saved from the agony of frivolous litigation in order to save the precious time of the Court because a court should not behave like a silent observer and allow a party to capture the whole system of justice for an indefinite time. [Lahore]

08/09/2024

---Remedy of substituted service could be resorted to only if the court was satisfied that there was a reason to believe that the other side was shying out only to avoid the service---

2024 CLC 907

- - -O. V, Rr.16, 17, 18, 21 & 23-Summoning of defendant(s)-- Due service---Substituted service – Scope - Civil Court allowed the defendant's application for setting aside ex-parte judgment and decree, however, revision of the plaintiffs was allowed and said order passed by the Civil Court was set aside on the basis that the substituted service was as effective as personal service and the Court might on the failure of defendant to appear when the suit was called for hearing proceed with the hearing of the suit ex-parte as substituted service had always been equated with that of due service - Validity---District Court failed to advert that the effectiveness of service could only be presumed authentic if either record or order reflected that the provisions of O.V of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, in relation to service of summons or through registered A.D. had been duly complied with---Remedy of substituted service could be resorted to only if the court was satisfied that there was a reason to believe that the other side was shying out only to avoid the service---District Court by reversing the Order passed by the Civil Court committed material irregularity as it failed to analyze the legal position that on account of non-adherence to the mandatory provisions of O.V of the C.P.C. in relation to service through ordinary modes, the service upon the petitioner/ defendant through substituted mode was inconsequential---High Court set-aside impugned order passed by the District Court and consequently upheld order passed by the Civil Court setting aside ex-parte judgement and decree— Constitutional petition filed by the defendant was allowed, in circumstances. [Lahore]