GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA THROUGH SECRETARY HOME, PESHAWAR vs ATTIQ ULLAH KHAN

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

GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA THROUGH SECRETARY HOME, PESHAWAR VS ATTIQ ULLAH KHAN. Rule 2(1)(l)---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Police Rules, 1975, Rule 2(iii)---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), Section 51---Constitution of Pakistan, Article 185(3)---Employee of police department terminated from service on account of being sent to civil prison under execution of a civil liability---Department considering such civil imprisonment as conviction---Legality---Non-mentioning of relevant law under which employee was proceeded---Effect. The respondent was appointed as a Special Police Officer and was removed from service after being sent to civil prison for non-payment of a decretal amount arising from execution proceedings. The respondent was reinstated by the High Court for a fresh inquiry, after which the department again terminated him on the basis that his civil imprisonment amounted to misconduct. The High Court set aside the second termination and reinstated the respondent. The department challenged the said judgment before the Supreme Court. The core legal question requiring determination before the Supreme Court was whether civil imprisonment under execution proceedings of a civil liability amounted to a conviction for purposes of service law, thereby justifying dismissal from service. Held: The respondent was issued a charge-sheet and statement of allegations while treating the period of three months during which the respondent remained in civil prison as a period of conviction. The department, while proceeding against the respondent, failed to mention the law or rules under which the departmental proceedings were initiated. There was no mention of any law or rules either in the charge-sheet, statement of allegations, show cause notice or order of the competent authority. This fact alone was sufficient to declare the entire proceedings initiated by the department against the respondent as nullity in the eyes of law because the respondent was not confronted with the relevant law and rule according to which he was held liable to be proceeded against and dismissed from service. From the definition of the term "conviction" as provided in dictionaries, it emerged that conviction was the result of a criminal trial in respect of a criminal offence and did not relate to civil proceedings. Therefore, even if a civil servant was sent to civil prison pursuant to execution proceedings in a civil suit, it could not amount to his conviction. Moreover, the primary objective of arrest and detention under Section 51(c), C.P.C., was to recover the decretal amount and not to punish the judgment-debtor. Civil imprisonment or detention was not a punitive measure but a coercive and remedial tool to enforce orders and decrees of the Court and could be purged upon compliance with the Court order. Civil imprisonment as a consequence of execution of civil liability did not amount to conviction and, therefore, did not affect the terms and conditions of service of the civil servant. The impugned judgment passed by the High Court was unexceptionable. The present petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and dismissed.

GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA THROUGH SECRETARY HOME, PESHAWAR vs ATTIQ ULLAH KHAN — 2026 SCMR 521 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 SCMR