IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Sardar Tariq Masood 
Mr. Justice Mazhar Alam Khan Miankhel 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
 
 
 
Crl. Petition No.1581 of 2021  
(Against the order dated 13.12.2021 passed by the Lahore High 
Court, Rawalpindi Bench in Crl. A. No.2126-B and 2045-/2021) 
 
 
 
Waqas Nazir and others 
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
The State & another  
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. Shaukat Aziz Siddiqi, ASC  
 
Pir Muhammad Masood Chishti, ASC 
 
Ch. M. Sasfdar Bhatti, ASC 
 
Syed Rifaqat Hussain Shah, AOR 
 
     
 
 
For the State:              
Mr. Muhammad Jaffar,  
 
Addl. P.G. Punjab with Muhammad 
Saqlain Naeem, DSP, Zeeshan Haider, 
SHO and M. Imran Khalid, ASI 
 
For the Respondent(s):             Malik Waheed Anjum, ASC 
 
 
Date of Hearing          
21.02.2022. 
 
ORDER 
 
 
 
Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.:- Proceedings in a pre-
arrest bail petition, pending before a learned Additional Sessions 
Judge at Rawalpindi, turned the District Court Complex into a battle 
field between the two rival factions of property developers, at 8:15 a.m. 
on 27.8.2021; both groups, each in numbers unusually large, took on 
each other and in the process ransacked benches at the first floor as 
well as nameplates of the Judges and used them as weapons of assault 
on their opponents; they also dismantled plastic pipes of air 
conditioners; the court staff attempted to intervene only to face their 
wrath and then confined themselves behind the safety of close doors; 
the Judges also retired after suspending the judicial work; a panic 
gripped the premises amid multiple fire shots; a police contingent 
detached at the court complex intervened and apprehended many of 
Crl. P. 1581/2021                                                                    2 
 
them at the spot. A criminal case was registered wherein both sides 
were arrayed side by side; present petitioners belong to one of them 
and seek bail after denial by a learned Judge-in-Chamber vide 
impugned order dated 13.12.2021, leave to appeal wherefrom is prayed 
for on the grounds that all the offences, based upon general 
allegations, are scheduled as bailable and that mischief of section 7 of 
the Anti Terrorism Act, 1997 is not attracted to the facts and 
circumstances of the case as the only injury sustained by one of the 
Advocates 
 
is 
designated 
as 
Shajjah-i-Khafifah 
within 
the 
contemplation of section 337 A(i) of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860. 
Continuous detention, by now exceeding six months in judicial lock 
up, is serving no useful purpose, a circumstance to be thoughtfully 
viewed by the Court, concluded the learned counsel. The learned Law 
Officer has defended the view taken by the High Court, in its 
discretion, being well within the remit of law. 
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
Pendency of an ad-interim pre arrest bail in a case of 
homicide before a learned Additional Sessions Judge on the eventful 
day is a common ground and so is assembly of a large number of 
supporters of each side in the court premises for purpose no other 
than to flex their muscles. Recovery memos confirm seizure of crime 
empties as well as two vehicles carrying offensive weapons with 
munitions right from inside the court premises. Damaged nameplates, 
broken benches and other installations removed during the occurrence 
are also part of the inventory. We entertain no manner of doubt that it 
was beginning of a day in District Courts Rawalpindi far from usual, 
disruptive and awe-inspiring, for which both sides, bracing each other 
in a large number of cases, cannot conveniently shield themselves 
behind a bald denial.  
 
District/Trial Courts constitute a most important tier of our 
judicial system; here parties brace each other face to face at close 
blank with the Judge and advocates within physical reaches; these 
temples of justice, by necessary implications, are required to be most 
guarded by law; it is essential that all those who man the first rung of 
judicial ladder attend their pursuits with the satisfaction of being safe 
and secure; it is equally important that even the mightiest cannot dare 
to contemplate a transgression without a backlash sanctioned by law 
Crl. P. 1581/2021                                                                    3 
 
and, thus, we find the High Court wise and conscionable in its 
discretion to disallow the motions.  
 
We do not consider it expedient to comment upon the argument 
relating to the suggested non-applicability of penal provisions invoked 
by the prosecution, a business to be best settled by the trial Court on 
the strength of material/evidence before it, uninfluenced by the issue 
specific observations recorded hereinabove. Even otherwise, the 
Supreme Court seldom interferes with exercise of discretion in bail 
matters, that too, in cases of denials, manifestly untenable, not the 
one in hand. Petition fails. Leave declined.  
 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
Islamabad, the 
21st February, 2022 
Azmat/- 
