| Case ID |
0a538cd0-18dc-478b-b753-f323402712ff |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Cr. A. No. 25 of 2017 |
| Decision Date |
Jun 25, 2018 |
| Hearing Date |
Jun 11, 2018 |
| Decision |
The appeal by the State against the acquittal of the respondents was allowed by the Islamabad High Court. The court determined that the judgment of the trial court was vitiated due to the pecuniary interest of the presiding judge who had been removed from service for accepting illegal gratification. The High Court set aside the trial court's judgment and remanded the case for a fresh decision, ensuring that all parties would have the opportunity to be heard. The decision emphasizes the principle that any pecuniary interest, no matter how slight, disqualifies a judge from presiding over a case, thus ensuring a fair trial and upholding the integrity of the judicial process. |
| Summary |
In the case of The State vs. Shoaib Ahmed Sheikh and others, the Islamabad High Court addressed significant issues regarding judicial bias and integrity. The case arose from allegations of cheating, forgery, and money laundering against the defendants. The trial court had acquitted the accused, but the State appealed, citing the presiding judge's removal for accepting bribes as a critical factor that compromised the trial's integrity. The High Court ruled that a judge's slightest pecuniary interest disqualifies them, thus setting a precedent for judicial accountability. This ruling underscores the importance of impartiality in legal proceedings, ensuring that justice is both done and seen to be done. The case references various laws, including the Pakistan Penal Code and the Anti Money Laundering Act, highlighting the legal framework governing such offenses. The decision to remand the case for retrial reaffirms the judicial system's commitment to fairness and due process. |
| Court |
Islamabad High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
THE STATE THROUGH DG FIA ISLAMABAD,
Messrs Axact (Pvt.) Limited
|
| Judges |
ATHAR MINALLAH,
MIANGUL HASSAN AURANGZEB
|
| Lawyers |
Dr. Babar Awan,
Raja Rizwan Abbasi,
Haroon-ur-Rashid,
Sohail Akhtar,
Sher Afzal Khan,
Naila Noreen,
Raaz Ali Shah,
Imdad Ali,
Tajamul Hussain
|
| Petitioners |
Syed Hamid Ali Shah,
Syed Ishfaq Hussain Naqvi,
Raja Khalid Mehmood,
Gohal Ali Shah
|
| Respondents |
26 OTHERS,
SHOAIB AHMED SHEIKH
|
| Citations |
2018 SLD 2584,
2018 PCRLJ 1264
|
| Other Citations |
Khairdi Khan and others v. The Crown PLD 1953 FC 223,
Haji Muhammad Jalal v. Ijaz Ahmad Bajwa, 2000 MLD 837,
Asif Ali Zardari and another v. The State PLD 2001 SC 568,
Aftab Shahban Mirani v. President of Pakistan 1998 SCMR 1863,
Ms. Benazir Bhutto v. The President of Pakistan 1992 SCMR 140,
Messrs MFMY Industries Ltd. v. Federation of Pakistan 2015 SCMR 1550,
Anwar and another v. The Crown PLD 1955 FC 185,
Federation of Pakistan v. Muhammad Akram Shaikh PLD 1989 SC 689,
Government of N.W.F.P. v. Dr. Hussain Ahmad Haroon 2003 SCMR 104,
Muhammad Adnan alias Dana v. State 2015 SCMR 1570
|
| Laws Involved |
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860,
Anti Money Laundering Act, 2010,
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),
Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002
|
| Sections |
419,
420,
468,
471,
4,
417,
36,
37
|