IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
 
PRESENT:  
MR. JUSTICE UMAR ATA BANDIAL 
MR. JUSTICE FAISAL ARAB 
MR. JUSTICE SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI 
 
 
 
 
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.860 OF 2019  
AND CMA NO.1760 OF 2019 
(Against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, 
Lahore dated 13.06.2019 passed in Criminal Appeal 
No. 111841/2017) 
 
 
Tariq Saeed 
… Petitioner 
 
 
 
Versus 
The State  
… Respondent 
 
 
 
For the Petitioner  
: 
Mr. Tanveer Iqbal, ASC  
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR 
 
 
 
For the Respondent 
(State)  
: 
 Haider Ali, Addl: Prosecutor General for 
NAB 
 
 
 
Date of Hearing 
: 
12.06.2020 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGMENT 
     
 
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J:-  
Crl. M. A No.1760 of 2019. For the reasons mentioned therein, the 
documents appended with this petition are allowed to be integral 
part of the record. 
Criminal Petition No.860 of 2019:  The petitioner has sought 
leave to appeal under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic 
Republic of Pakistan, 1973, against the judgment dated 13.06.2019 
passed by learned Division Bench of Lahore High Court, Lahore in 
Criminal Appeal No. 111841 of 2017. 
Criminal Petition No.860 of 2019 
-: 2 :-
2. 
 
The facts necessitated to disclose the prosecution case 
are that petitioner being a public servant in the capacity as XEN 
(BPS-18) remained posted in Zila Council for a considerable period at 
Lahore. During the subsistence of his service a source report was 
generated wherein serious allegations were levelled against the 
petitioner that he in the capacity as a public servant while misusing 
of authority is involved in corruption and corrupt practices. As a 
consequence an enquiry was ordered to be initiated against the 
petitioner dated 12.09.2006. During inquiry proceedings, the inquiry 
officer scrutinized the allegation at length and submitted a 
comprehensive report to the quarter concerned. As the enquiry officer 
concurred the details of the source report, the competent authority 
while examining the details of the report, ordered for upgradation of 
enquiry into investigation with the approval of Chairman, National 
Accountability Bureau vide dated 19.10.2010. The gist of the 
allegation against the petitioner surfaced during the investigation 
conducted by various investigating officers, it was unanimously 
concluded that he being a public servant while holding a public 
office indulged into corruption and corrupt practices. As a result of 
same, he acquired massive immovable properties and was also 
holding a number of bank accounts maintained by him which were 
squarely disproportionate to known source of his income. The 
prosecution further alleged that the petitioner purchased the 
properties against the name of his wife Mst. Surayya Tariq as 
“Benamidar”. She was also holding bank accounts against her 
name although she had no other known source of income. 
Criminal Petition No.860 of 2019 
-: 3 :-
3. 
 
Soon after completion of investigation proceedings, 
reference was chalked out against the petitioner while in terms of 
section 18(g) read with Section 24(b) of National Accountability 
Ordinance, 1999. Requisite sanction from Chairman, National 
Accountability Bureau was obtained, hence, a reference No. 7/2015 
dated 12.02.2015 under section 9 (a) (v) (vi) (xii) of National 
Accountability Ordinance 1999 was filed before Accountability Court 
No.1, Lahore. The learned trial court took the cognizance of the 
offences and on the basis of accusation charge was framed against 
the petitioner on 07.05.2015. During the course of proceedings 
before the learned trial court, prosecution to substantiate the 
accusation levelled in the reference produced as many as 14 
witnesses. A number of documents were also tendered in evidence. 
The learned trial court recorded the statement of petitioner under 
section 342 Cr.P.C, however, co-accused Mst. Surayya Tariq died 
soon after recording of her statement under section 342 Cr.P.C. as 
such the proceedings against her stood abated. The petitioner also 
produced Syed Obaid-ur-Rehman, Assistant Commissioner (Inland 
Revenue) who appeared as DW-1 in defence of the petitioner, 
however, the petitioner himself not opted to appear in his own 
defence in terms of section 340 Cr.P.C. Besides this, the petitioner 
also tendered in evidence certain documents on 03.03.2017 and 
19.05.2017. 
4. 
 
The learned trial court after completion of trial found the 
allegation levelled against the petitioner stands proved, hence, 
sentenced the petitioner under section 10 of National Accountability 
Ordinance, 1999 for imprisonment of seven years R.I. He was 
Criminal Petition No.860 of 2019 
-: 4 :-
further awarded fine of Rs.1,63,00,000/- The farm house belonging 
to the petitioner was also ordered to be confiscated in favour of the 
State. Being aggrieved by the judgment of the learned trial court 
dated 
15.11.2017; 
the 
petitioner 
filed 
criminal 
appeal 
No.111841/2017 before the Lahore High Court, Lahore. The learned 
Division Bench of Lahore High Court, Lahore vide judgment dated 
13.06.2019 dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and the judgment 
of the learned trial court was maintained in toto, hence, instant 
petition. 
5. 
 
At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner 
argued that prosecution has miserably failed to substantiate the 
accusation against the petitioner. Contends that conviction and 
sentence has been recorded on the basis of photocopies and even 
the documents are not exhibited as per spirit of law. The learned 
counsel especially referred the statement of Mahboob-ul-Hassan 
(PW-7), therefore, the sentence and conviction recorded against 
petitioner is uncalled for. Learned counsel further states that the 
petitioner is an old man of 72 years facing incarceration and has 
already undergone substantial part of the sentence. Lastly it has 
been argued by learned counsel that even if at all it is assumed that 
prosecution has succeeded to establish the case, the sentence of the 
petitioner is harsh, hence, he prayed for reduction of sentence on the 
ground of poor health and old age of the petitioner. 
6. 
 
Learned Law Officer appearing on behalf of NAB has 
argued that he being involved in white-collar crime cannot seek 
exception. It is further argued that being a public office holder he has 
crossed all limits and amassed huge properties disproportionate to 
Criminal Petition No.860 of 2019 
-: 5 :-
his known source of income; hence, he is not entitled for any 
leniency. The learned Law Officer contended that the contentions 
raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not sustainable in 
the eye of law as Mahboob-ul-Hassan (PW-7) clerk of Motor 
Registration Authority, Excise and Taxation Department at the time 
of his statement on 28.10.2015 was in possession of record of the 
vehicles registered against the name of the petitioner and his (late) 
wife. During the course of proceedings he produced before the court 
the attested photocopies whereas the record was also available, 
hence, this contention is without any legal justification and is based 
upon misconception. Contends that two courts below had given 
concurrent findings qua the guilt of the petitioner and he was earlier 
involved in such like activities. In this regard, he entered into plea-
bargain in reference No.07/2001 on 08.07.2001. Reference No. 
94/2004 and reference No. 48/2016 are still pending adjudication 
before Accountability Court, hence, no exception can be taken by this 
Court at this stage, however, learned Law Officer could not  
controvert the factum of the old age & sickness of the petitioner.  
7. 
 
We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at 
preliminary stage and gone through the record. 
8. 
 
There is no denial to this fact that both the courts below 
had attended the contentions raised by learned counsel for the 
petitioner minutely and found that accusation against the petitioner 
was fully proved. There is no second thought about the involvement 
of the petitioner in corruption and corrupt practices, even the 
petitioner himself tendered in evidence the record of previous 
reference No.07/2001 wherein he entered into plea-bargain 
Criminal Petition No.860 of 2019 
-: 6 :-
whereupon the application was allowed by competent authority 
dated 12.06.2001. The petitioner is also involved in other references, 
the detail of which has also been mentioned above which reflects the 
antecedent of the petitioner qua his involvement. We are reluctant to 
make any observation as it might prejudice his case but facts 
remain that reference No. 94/2004 and reference No. 48/2016 are 
still pending adjudication before the court of competent jurisdiction. 
We have scrutinized the evidence available on the record with due 
care and caution. The main stay of the arguments of learned counsel 
regarding production of photocopies is not substantiated from the 
record rather the record clearly reflected that these were attested 
copies when the record of the vehicles under the name of petitioner 
and his wife was also available in the court. Even during the course 
of cross examination the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the 
petitioner has not confronted the examination-in-chief of Mahboob-ul-
Hassan (PW-7) which is assumed that same is an admitted fact. 
Any unrebutted piece of evidence during the course of cross 
examination leaves only one conclusion that the same is an 
admitted by the defence. Otherwise the petitioner was at liberty to 
agitate this aspect before the learned trial court as an objection but 
the same has not been raised. Even the same could have been 
agitated during the proceedings before the learned High Court. We 
have perused the record but could not find an iota of evidence 
available on the record to substantiate the contention ever raised by 
learned counsel for the petitioner before two forums below, hence, at 
this juncture of time raising of such plea without substance seems to 
be nothing but an afterthought. 
Criminal Petition No.860 of 2019 
-: 7 :-
9. 
 
As far as the merits of the case are concerned, we do 
not find any reason for interference into the findings given by both 
the courts below. As far as the contention of the learned counsel 
appearing on behalf of petitioner qua the old age and indisposition of 
the petitioner is concerned, it is observed that very genesis of white-
collar crime has engulfed the educated-cum-privileged class while 
intruding its contours into the society which has almost become 
epidemic leaving miserable repercussions individually as well as 
collectively. It is detrimental to the very fabric of the society.  
However, while relying on case titled " MUHAMMAD ASHRAF alias 
Chaudhry versus THE STATE" (1994 SCMR 667) and while taking 
into consideration that the petitioner is an old man with poor health 
condition, whereas he has already undergone substantial part of 
sentence recorded by both the courts, we deem it appropriate to 
meet the ends of justice reduce the sentence already inflicted upon 
the petitioner from seven years to five years while maintaining the 
sentence of fine of Rs.1,63,00,000/- and confiscation of farm-house 
belonging to petitioner in favour of the State. In the above said 
terms, this petition is converted into appeal and partly allowed 
. 
Judge 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad,  
12.06.2020 
Approved for reporting. 
Athar                                                                                               
