Muhammad Tahir Vs The State etc

Form No.HCJD/C-121

ORDER SHEET

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT,LAHORE

JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

Crl. Misc. No.41170-B of 2026 Muhammad Tahir Vs. The State, etc.

S.No. of Date of order/ Order with signature of Judge, and that of order/ Proceedings parties of counsel, where necessary. Proceedings 22.07.2026. Mr. Amjad Farouck Bismil Rajpoot, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Babra Akram Jadoon, Assistant Attorney General with Usman, SI/Federal Investigation Agency Nemo for the complainant.

Through this petition filed under section 497 Cr.P.C., petitioner seeks post arrest bail in case FIR bearing No.C-139 dated 09.04.2026 registered under sections 17/22 of Emigration Ordinance, 1979 & 3/6 of Prevention of Smuggling of Migrants Act, 2018 at Police Station FIA CC, District Gujrat.

2.FIR records that on the intervening night of 5th and 6th April 2026, a boat carrying migrants capsized near the Libyan coast, resulting in the death of seventy-three persons, including Ameer Hamza Shoukat. His brother, Kamran Shoukat, lodged a complaint alleging that in 2025, Ameer Hamza was deceived by one Luqman Hakeem, resident of Tehsil Phalia, District Mandi Bahauddin. Hakeem, presenting himself as an overseas employment agent, entered into an agreement with the family for the sum of Rs. 3.5 million, promising to arrange Ameer Hamza’s travel to Italy. The complainant stated that the family initially transferred Rs. 200,000 into the bank account of Khurram Shahzad. Subsequently, Ameer Hamza was sent to Libya via Saudi Arabia, where he was abducted and detained in a confinement facility. The abductors demanded further payments, compelling the family to transfer Rs. 440,000 into the account of Zohaib Haider, Rs. 560,000 in installments into the account of AK Air Travels, and Rs. 900,000 into the account of Madina Traders, operated by Muhammad Tahir, the petitioner.

3.The inquiry revealed that Tahir’s all accounts were not truly his own; they were managed under the direction of Akbar Ali of Gojra. Yet, despite this finding, Tahir was singled out. His counsel, while acknowledging the enormity of the tragedy, lamented the investigative process. He argued that the agency lacked the capacity to gather legally admissible evidence, a cornerstone of criminal jurisprudence. Instead of pursuing the transnational dimensions of the crime invoking mechanisms of mutual legal assistance or tracing networks beyond borders, investigators clung to fragments of financial transactions.

4.The counsel stressed that no other offenders had been arrested, and Tahir’s alleged involvement rested solely on one transaction linked to Madina Traders. He had never met the complainant, never dealt with the victim, and his connection with co-accused remained unproven. Even the inquiry itself concluded that Akbar Ali controlled his accounts. Yet, in what the counsel described as a “customary practice,” the FIA now sought to implicate Tahir under the Anti-Money Laundering Act, a fallback when substantive evidence is absent. Thus, the narrative of this case is not only about a shipwreck but also about the wreckage of justice: a tragedy compounded by investigative inertia, where organized crime thrives in shadows, and innocent men risk being ensnared in the net of suspicion without the safeguard of due process.

5.On the other hand, the learned Assistant Attorney General rose with solemnity and spoke with deliberate care to align the investigation with the culpability of the petitioner. Her argument rested on the presumption that the transfer of funds into his account carried an inherent plausibility of guilt, a presumption that, in her view, demanded explanation from the accused. In the language of law, she leaned upon the principle that suspicious transactions, when unexplained, may themselves give rise to an inference of complicity.

6.Yet, her submission bore a silence that was striking. She spoke not of the transnational reach of this crime, nor of the duty to pursue

evidence across borders. No mention was made of Libya, where organized criminal networks orchestrate such tragedies, nor of the mechanisms of mutual legal assistance that international law provides to pierce the veil of foreign jurisdictions. The record remained barren of any request for cooperation with counterparts abroad. Thus, her effort, earnest though it was, seemed confined within the narrow walls of domestic suspicion. The broader canvas of transnational organized crime a realm where jurisdictional boundaries blur and justice demands international collaboration was left untouched. In this omission lies the tension: while the petitioner’s culpability was painted as presumptive, the investigation itself faltered in meeting the higher standard of proof that criminal law requires. The narrative, therefore, is one of partial pursuit: a prosecutorial voice pressing upon the plausibility of guilt, yet leaving unanswered the larger question of whether justice can truly be served without reaching beyond borders to confront the crime at its source.

7.The soaring situation placed before the court demanded more than a cursory glance; it called for a carefully sketched line of inquiry. Only by descending to the lowest ebb of the case and then rising to its horizon could investigators hope to clutch every minute detail, painting a picture of broader criminality. Such a canvas, even if incomplete, might at least build a prima facie case, the proverbial “51% case”, sufficient to convince a trial court to launch a successful prosecution.

8.Law, however, is not built on suspicion alone. The substantive framework governing this tragedy lies first and foremost in the punitive provisions of the Prevention of Smuggling of Migrants Act 2018. This statute sets the evidentiary requirements, demanding that investigators move beyond conjecture and into the realm of admissible proof. From there, attention must turn to the related provisions that guide the collection of such evidence the procedural arteries through which justice flows. Yet, as the court observed, deficiencies in the relevant law remain. The absence of

mechanisms for effective mutual legal assistance, the lack of transnational reach in investigations, and the failure to adapt domestic statutes to the realities of organized crime across borders all leave gaps that criminals exploit. It is here that suitable amendments must be considered, not merely to punish after the fact, but to empower investigators to prevent another tragedy. Thus, the narrative is not only about one shipwreck, but about the law itself its strengths, its silences, and its urgent need for reform. Only by bridging these gaps can justice rise from the shadows of suspicion to the light of conviction.

9.The Prevention of Smuggling of Migrants Act 2018 is one of Pakistan’s key legal frameworks aimed at tackling the growing challenge of human trafficking. This issue has intensified in recent years due to a range of socio-economic pressures. Widespread poverty, persistent joblessness, and feelings of insecurity are among the most significant drivers pushing individuals especially young people to look for opportunities outside the country. Many disadvantaged families see migration as a lifeline, inspired by the financial success of households with members working abroad. However, the absence of affordable and accessible legal migration channels forces many to turn to irregular routes. The high costs and complexities of lawful visa procedures make traffickers’ offers appear more appealing. They lure them with promises of lucrative jobs abroad, only to entrap them in cycles of forced labor, sexual exploitation, or bonded servitude. In this way, traffickers’ profit from desperation while perpetuating a cycle of exploitation that continues to devastate communities.

10.As a torch bearer a voice raised in Punjab Pakistan through an article, a thought-provoking piece authored by Mr. Akhtar Hussain and Ms. Nuzhat Bashir, Prosecutors of the Punjab Criminal Prosecution Service, the tangled web of Pakistan’s anti- trafficking laws is laid bare. Their article paints a vivid picture of overlapping statutes and fragmented provisions that often blur the

Crl. Misc. No.41170-B of 2026 5

lines of justice rather than sharpen them. They carefully dissect the interplay between the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, the Emigration Ordinance 1979, the Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act 2018, and the Prevention of Smuggling of Migrants Act 2018. What emerges is a landscape riddled with contradictions particularly the Emigration Ordinance, whose narrow scope and conflicting provisions fail to protect victims in a meaningful way. The authors highlight how the absence of a victim-centered framework leaves survivors adrift, while procedural gaps in the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 and the underutilization of independent prosecution services, such as those envisioned in the Punjab Criminal Prosecution Service Act 2006, further weaken the fight against trafficking. Beyond domestic shortcomings, the study casts a critical eye on Pakistan’s compliance with international obligations, particularly the UN Trafficking Protocol (Palermo Protocol). The verdict is clear: while laws exist, they remain misaligned with global standards. In response, the paper calls for sweeping legislative reforms harmonizing domestic statutes with international commitments, embedding victim-centric protections, and empowering law enforcement through specialized training, dedicated units, and adequate resources. Only then, the authors argue, can Pakistan’s legal and institutional machinery rise to meet the challenge of human trafficking with the strength it demands. A comprehensive understanding of Human Trafficking requires an integrated conceptual and theoretical framework that covers its legal definitions and institutional shortcomings. The existing definitions under international and Pakistani laws provide a foundation for fighting Human Trafficking, but the fragmented legal framework and weak enforcement mechanisms create substantial challenges. 1

“Human Trafficking in Pakistan: Legal Challenges and the Way Forward” by Akhtar Hussain & Nuzhat Bashir, published in Journal “Global Political Review. www.gprjournal.com DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.31703/gpr.

11.The Court addresses the evidentiary standard, considering what type and degree of proof is sufficient to establish a prima facie case on the balance of probabilities, i.e., a 51% likelihood. The focus is on identifying the minimum evidence required to reasonably support such a finding. As discussed above evidentiary requirement to prove an offence lies in the penal provisions of a statute; let’s see what the Prevention of Smuggling of Migrants Act 2018 demands through its following related penal provisions;

3.Punishment of smuggling of migrants. Whoever intentionally engages in or attempts to engage in the smuggling of migrants shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to 1[ten years and with fine up to ten] million rupees. (a) (b) commits an offence.

4.Offences in relation to documents. (l) Whoever intentionally, for the purpose of getting benefit, produces or attempts to produce a document for the purpose of enabling the smuggling of migrants; or procures, provides, or possesses, or attempts to procure, ‘provide, or possess a document for the purpose of enabling the smuggling of migrants,

(2)Whoever commits or attempts to commit an offence under sub-section (1) shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to 1[ten years but shall not be less than three years and with fine up to five] million rupees.

6.Aggravated offences. The offences under sections 3, 4, and 5 shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to fourteen years but which shall not be less than 1[seven years and with fine up to ten] million rupees in any of the following circumstances,

(a)where the offence involves serious injury, life- threatening illness, or death, or other circumstances that endanger, or are likely to endanger, the life or safety of the smuggled migrant or another person;

(b)where the offence involves cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of another person; or

(c)where the offence was committed as part of the activity of an organized criminal group.

7.Offence of abetment and criminal conspiracy. (1) Whoever abets any of the offences under section 3,4,5 or 6, shall be punished in accordance with Chapter V of the Penal Code.

(2)Any person who is party to a criminal conspiracy to commit an offence under section 3,4,5 or 6 shall be punished in accordance with Chapter V-A of the Penal Code.

First, the Court examines the requirement set out in Section 3 above. In the legal sense, the word “engage” in the phrase “intentionally engages in or attempts to engage in the smuggling of migrants” means to participate in, carry out, or involve oneself in

an act or activity. It is not casual involvement, it implies a deliberate, active role in the commission of the offence. So, legally engage means, to take part in or perform the act of smuggling migrants.

 It covers both direct actions (e.g., organizing, transporting, or facilitating smuggling) and indirect involvement (e.g., financing or coordinating).

 The phrase “attempts to engage” extends liability to those who may not complete the act but make a substantial effort toward it.

In short, “engage” here means knowingly and intentionally participating in the smuggling process, whether by planning, executing, or assisting in the crime.

12.Under Pakistan’s anti-smuggling laws, investigators bear the responsibility of proving the offence prescribed in Section 3. The evidentiary requirement demands that the prosecution establish the accused’s direct involvement through concrete proof, rather than relying solely on presumptions or suspicion. The process of investigation begins with the constitution of an authorized raiding party and, where necessary, the securing of warrants for search and seizure. Private witnesses may be associated if feasible or if they volunteer to join. Thereafter, investigators must collect tangible documentary and digital evidence, such as registers, ledgers, receipts, laptops, mobile devices, CNICs, travel documents, cheque books, or any other items linking the accused to the premises. Electronic material, including WhatsApp chats, videos, images, and bank statements of both accused and victims, is crucial where it reveals transfers of money intended for illegal migration or suspicious transactions connecting the accused to organized groups. The stance of the parties should be recorded, preferably on video,2 with particular attention to the accused’s response when confronted with incriminating evidence.

A complete inspection of the site raided, or the place where illicit agreements were made, must be carried out. This includes “APPLICATION BY HUSSAIN NAWAZ SHARIF” (PLD 2019 Supreme Court, 196).

photographing the premises, annotating notable articles found, and verifying ownership or tenancy records to tie the location back to the accused. Witness statements, if available, are vital to establish patterns of conduct, especially where the accused has routinely engaged in similar activities, thereby supporting similar fact evidence.

The inquiry extends further to print, electronic, and social media, where relevant material must be collected and formalized into admissible formats. Proof of travel agency licenses, photographs of signboards, pamphlets, and handouts may all serve as supporting evidence. Digital footprints, including social media activity, recorded calls, and call detail records (CDRs) mapping the accused’s location and associations, must be carefully summarized and authenticated by authorized officers.

Finally, the travel history of both victim and accused, together with correspondence with international agencies, is essential to uncover transnational networks and to establish the broader scope of the offence.

13.In the course of investigation, documents produced by the accused to facilitate smuggling cannot be treated as forged unless their authenticity is verified by the issuing authority. Investigators must trace the origin of such papers, seize the equipment used in their preparation, and demonstrate its capacity by producing sample prints, thereby proving the offence under Section 4, either independently or in conjunction with Section 3. Where victims sustain injuries abroad, medicolegal examinations, treatment records, and psychological assessments become essential to establish aggravated offences under Section 6. Conspiracies and acts of abetment are uncovered through witness testimony, forensic traces, and digital evidence to prove offence under section 7. Yet the principle remains clear that mere transfer of funds into an accused’s account is not sufficient proof unless it is directly connected to their involvement or linked to an organized group.

The law does not permit conviction on presumption alone, nor does it compel the accused to justify every financial transaction. Instead, it requires investigators to build their case upon solid, corroborated evidence, that is carefully gathered, verified, and anchored in fact. Such rigor is achievable only if a competent prosecution branch works in close collaboration with investigators, ensuring that the material collected is transformed into admissible form for proper presentation before the Court.

14.In this case, the investigators established only that a certain amount was transferred by the complainant into the account of Madina Traders. Although the account was in the petitioner’s name, the investigators themselves admitted that it was operated and controlled by one Akbar Ali. This leaves the prosecution case without sufficient evidence to connect the petitioner either as a member of an organized group or to prove that the funds were received with his active knowledge. Thus, the petitioner has succeeded to make out a case for further inquiry, principles whereof have been laid down by Superior Courts of Pakistan in various cases3. Petitioner is behind the bars since 19.04.2026, investigation of the case is complete and his person is no more required for the purpose of further investigation.

15.In view of what has been discussed above, the petition in hand is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to post arrest bail upon furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.500,000/- (five lacs) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, subject to the following conditions;

a) The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or threaten the prosecution witnesses in any manner.

b) The petitioner shall not leave the territorial jurisdiction of this Court without prior written permission from the investigating officer/trial court.

“HAMID ALI Versus THE STATE” (2009 SCMR 734); “SHAFQAT HUSSAIN Versus The STATE and another” (2025 YLR 2350); “AKHTAR versus KHAWAS KHAN and another” (2024 SCMR 476) “MAZHAR ALI versus The STATE and another” (2025 SCMR 318), “ATTAULLAH versus The STATE” (2024 SCMR 1210), “MUHAMMAD NAWAZ alias KARO Versus The STATE” (2023 SCMR 734) & “NOOR KAMAL and another Versus The STATE and another” (2023 SCMR 999).

c) The petitioner shall surrender his passport, if any, and shall make himself available for the investigation/trial as and when required.

16.Observations made hereinabove are tentative and shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during the actual trial. In case of misuse of the concession of bail or deliberate delay attributable to the petitioner in conclusion of trial, the learned trial Court shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law including cancellation of bail.

17.In parting with this order, the Court deems it a solemn duty to shield citizens from exploitation and the scourge of organized crime, by urging the enactment of special rules of evidence, framed with wisdom and forged through the counsel of all stakeholders in the criminal justice system.

(MUHAMMAD AMJAD RAFIQ)

JUDGE

Approved for Reporting

Judge Signed on 24.07.2026 M. Azhar*