State vs Malik Saddam Jan Ss — 2026 MLD 996 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

State VS Malik Saddam Jan Ss. 3 & 7---COVID-19 (Prevention of Hoarding) Act (XLI of 2020), S. 3---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 10-A---Hoarding---Conviction based on deficient record and violation of due process---Due process, requirements of---Accused-respondent was caught red-handed and a huge quantity of sugar was recovered from his premises, despite the fact that he was not an authorized dealer of sugar---On the basis of his alleged confession, respondent was fined Rs. 2,00,000/- by the Assistant Commissioner acting as Special Magistrate---Appeal filed by respondent was allowed---Validity---Petitioner-State, in revision, failed to place on record the proceedings of the Special Magistrate, including complaint, order of conviction or any proper record of summary trial---Only document available was a printed receipt of deposit of fine, filled in by hand---Neither complaint, statement of allegations, show-cause notice, nor any record of trial proceedings was available---Even in the printed form, it was not clear under which statute conviction had been recorded---Such bald endorsement like “pleads guilty” did not satisfy mandatory legal requirements, nor constituted a lawful confession or valid judicial order---Proceedings stood vitiated on this score alone---Article 10-A of the Constitution guarantees right to fair trial and due process, applicable to all proceedings---Due process requires notice, opportunity of hearing, impartial forum and lawful procedure---In absence of these minimum safeguards, proceedings become unsustainable---In the present case, essential requirements of due process were wholly absent---Criminal Revision Petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

State vs Malik Saddam Jan Ss — 2026 MLD 996 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 MLD