IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN  
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
MR. JUSTICE MUSHIR ALAM 
MR. JUSTICE SARDAR TARIQ MASOOD  
MR. JUSTICE AMIN-UD-DIN KHAN 
 
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.390-L OF 2021 
Against the order dated 25.02.2021 passed by Lahore 
High Court, Lahore in Crl.Misc.-6413B/2021 
 
 
Muhammad Qasim, etc  
…Petitioner(s) 
                                        VERSUS 
The State, etc 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Rashad Javid Lodhi, ASC 
 
 
For the State: 
 
 
 
 
On Court call: 
Mr. M. Usman, DPG Pb. 
M. Rafique, ASI 
Syed Ali Sibtain, Drug Inspector 
Ali Raza, IO 
 
Mr. Sajid Ilyas Bhatti, Addl. AGP 
Rana Arif Kamal Noon, PG Pb. 
Mr. Naveed Anwar, Drug Controller Rwp. 
 
 
Date of Hearing: 
11.06.2021 
 
O R D E R 
 
MUSHIR ALAM, J.— From the record, it appears that there is some 
confusion and even the matter has been adjourned a number of time 
to seek assistance from the learned Attorney General for Pakistan as 
well as the learned Advocate General concerned as regard the 
regulatory framework for the alternate medicines, it is recorded with 
great concern and utmost dismay that neither the learned Additional 
Attorney General nor the concerned Advocate General or even the 
team of officers in attendance are clear in their minds as to how the 
alternate medicines are properly brought into regulatory framework 
and they vaguely are concerned as to manufacturing and import of 
such alternate medicines. When inquired as to whether such 
dispensers (Pensaris) and their sale points are registered?, more 
specifically inquired about such outlets situated at Abpara Market in 
Islamabad, which is a common sight, it is stated that they are neither 
enlisted nor inspected to their knowledge. They have put the 
responsibility on the task force constituted and comprises of selected 
officers from all the Provinces. None of the officers present in Court are 
aware of the responsibility as to who regulates such alternate 
medicines.  
2. 
 
As regard the above matter, we direct the office to make a 
separate file, register it as Suo Motu Case and place the same before 
the Honourable Chief Justice for placing the same before an 
appropriate Bench to consider the regulatory framework for such 
alternate medicines, their dispensation either in raw form or in the 
form of finishing products so as to ensure that people are not haunted 
for being looted and harmed. There appears to be no awareness 
amongst the persons involved in dealing with such products at 
different levels.  
3. 
 
Coming to the merits of the instant bail matter. It appears 
that the petitioners, Muhammad Qasim and Khurram Shahzad sons of 
Anwar-u-Haq, seek bail in Crime No.950/2020 dated 03.10.2020, for 
the offences under Sections 23 & 27 of the Drugs Act, 1976, Section 
27-2 of the DRAP Act, 2012 and Section 109 PPC, registered at Police 
Station Toba Tek Singh, on the allegation of their involvement in 
manufacturing/stocking and selling the drugs/therapeutic goods in 
violation of the laws of the land.  
4. 
 
Heard. Record perused.  
5. 
 
Although the learned prosecutor states that the medicines 
in question fall within the definition of alternate medicines within 
contemplation of Section 2(ii) of the DRAP Act, 2012, yet the principal 
accused, Israr Ahmed has since been conceded bail.  
CP 390-L/21  
 
 
-2- 
6. 
 
Having gone through the available record, we find that the 
present petitioners are still on the better footing, therefore, following 
the rule of consistency, the petitioners are also conceded to bail 
subject to furnishing of solvent surety bonds to the tune of 
Rs.100,000/- (rupees one hundred thousand) each with one surety 
each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.  
7. 
 
Needless to state that any observation contained in this 
order is of tentative nature and the learned Trial Court shall decide the 
main case in accordance with law without being influenced from any 
observation contained therein. The petitioners are directed to extend 
full co-operation with the prosecution/investigation and in the 
proceedings regularly and in case any misuse and abuse of concession 
of bail is found on their part, the learned Trial Court is at liberty to 
cancel the petitioners’ bail.  
8.  
 
The petition is converted into an appeal and allowed in the 
terms noted above. 
 
 
 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
ISLAMABAD 
11th June, 2021 
Mudassar/                               “Not approved for reporting” 
 
 
 
CP 390-L/21  
 
 
-3- 
