Early Life and Legal Career

Every successful judicial career begins with a strong legal foundation. Judge Sheikh Sajjad completed his legal education in 1986 and entered the legal profession as an advocate.

Like many young lawyers, he started his journey by practicing law, appearing before courts, studying legal principles, and learning the practical realities of litigation. His years as an advocate allowed him to understand the challenges faced by litigants, lawyers, and courts.

However, his ambitions extended beyond legal practice. He wished to contribute directly to the administration of justice.

In 2002, after successfully passing the competitive judicial examination, he joined the judiciary as an Additional District and Sessions Judge. This marked the beginning of a distinguished judicial career that would last approximately:

• 21 years
• 9 months
• 16 days

Throughout these years, he served in various judicial assignments and dealt with a wide range of civil and criminal matters.

A Judge’s Commitment to Justice

One of the most striking aspects of Judge Sheikh Sajjad’s interview was his unwavering confidence in the decisions he made during his career.

When asked whether he had any regrets about his judicial service, he answered firmly that he had none.

According to him, every judgment he delivered was based upon three fundamental pillars:

1. The Law

A judge’s foremost duty is to apply the law as enacted by the legislature and interpreted by higher courts.

2. Evidence on Record

Courts cannot decide cases based on assumptions, rumors, emotions, or public sentiment. Every decision must be supported by admissible evidence.

3. Judicial Conscience

A judge’s conscience serves as an internal guide, ensuring fairness, impartiality, and honesty in decision-making.

Judge Sheikh Sajjad emphasized that whenever these three elements aligned, he felt confident that justice had been served.

The Tragic Zainab Murder Case

Among all the cases he handled, none attracted as much public attention as the Zainab Murder Case.

The case shocked the entire nation.

Young Zainab, an innocent child, became the victim of a horrific crime that sparked outrage throughout Pakistan. Citizens demanded immediate justice, while media coverage intensified public emotions.

At the time of the incident in January 2018, Judge Sheikh Sajjad was in the holy cities of:

• Makkah
• Madinah

He recalled feeling deeply saddened after learning about the tragedy. Witnessing the collective grief of the nation, he prayed that Allah would provide an opportunity for justice to be delivered in the case.

After returning to Pakistan, events unfolded in an extraordinary manner.

The accused, Imran Ali, was arrested, and Judge Sheikh Sajjad was nominated by the then Chief Justice of the Lahore High Court to conduct the trial.

He was instructed to conclude the proceedings within seven days.

For the judge, this assignment felt like the acceptance of the prayer he had made during his pilgrimage.

Ensuring a Fair Trial Despite Public Pressure

One of the greatest tests for any judge occurs when a case attracts massive public attention.

The public often expects swift punishment, media outlets continuously report developments, and emotions run high. Yet the court must remain impartial.

Judge Sheikh Sajjad emphasized that despite overwhelming public pressure, the legal rights of the accused were fully protected.

This commitment demonstrated an important principle:

Justice requires fairness not only for victims but also for accused persons.

The court ensured that:

• The accused had legal representation.
• A competent defense lawyer was appointed.
• The accused understood his legal rights.
• All proceedings were conducted according to law.

This adherence to due process reinforced public confidence in the judicial system.

The Confession of Imran Ali

During the proceedings, the accused expressed his desire to confess.

However, Pakistani criminal law requires courts to exercise great caution when dealing with confessional statements.

Judge Sheikh Sajjad explained that he followed all legal safeguards.

Before recording the confession, he:

• Warned the accused about the consequences.
• Explained that the confession could be used against him.
• Allowed time for reconsideration.
• Ensured there was no coercion.
• Confirmed that the statement was voluntary.

Only after satisfying himself regarding these requirements did he proceed.

The accused then provided a detailed confession concerning the crimes.

According to the judge, the accused also revealed disturbing details about his childhood experiences and admitted involvement in previous criminal conduct.

Why a Confession Alone Is Not Enough

Many people assume that once an accused person confesses, the case automatically ends.

Judge Sheikh Sajjad clarified that this belief is incorrect.

Under Pakistani law, particularly in cases involving capital punishment, a confession alone is insufficient to justify conviction and sentencing.

Even after the confession:

Evidence Was Presented

The prosecution introduced documentary and forensic evidence.

Witnesses Were Examined

Witnesses appeared before the court and testified under oath.

Cross-Examination Was Allowed

The defense lawyer had the opportunity to challenge the prosecution’s case.

Legal Requirements Were Fulfilled

Every procedural safeguard required by law was observed.

Only after evaluating the entire body of evidence did the court reach its conclusion.

This demonstrates a fundamental principle of criminal justice:

Courts convict people on evidence, not emotions.

Justice Must Be Done and Seen to Be Done

One of the most memorable observations made by Judge Sheikh Sajjad concerns the concept of justice itself.

He explained that justice cannot be partial.

Either justice is done or it is not.

Moreover, justice must not only exist in reality but must also be visible to society.

The Zainab case became a powerful example of this principle because:

• Legal procedures were followed.
• Defense rights were protected.
• Evidence was thoroughly examined.
• The judgment was delivered according to law.

As a result, the public could see that justice had been administered through proper legal channels rather than through public pressure.

The case later became one of the fastest concluded criminal cases in Pakistan’s history.

Courts Decide Cases on Evidence, Not Public Opinion

Another important lesson from Judge Sheikh Sajjad’s interview concerns the role of evidence.

In modern times, public opinion is heavily influenced by:

• Television coverage
• Social media platforms
• News reports
• Public campaigns

However, judges cannot rely on these sources.

Judge Sheikh Sajjad stressed that courts are not eyewitnesses to events.

Judges can only consider what is legally presented before them.

This principle protects individuals from wrongful convictions.

If evidence creates reasonable doubt, the accused must receive the benefit of that doubt.

This reflects the internationally recognized principle:

Every accused person is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Such protections are essential for maintaining fairness and preventing miscarriages of justice.

Relationship Between Judges and Lawyers

The courtroom is a place where strong arguments and differing viewpoints frequently collide.

Judge Sheikh Sajjad acknowledged that disagreements occasionally occurred between him and lawyers, particularly during his service in Lahore.

He explained that lawyers often become emotionally invested in their clients’ cases.

As a result:

• Tensions may arise.
• Heated exchanges may occur.
• Professional disagreements become inevitable.

Nevertheless, he maintained that no amount of pressure ever influenced his judgments.

Every decision continued to be based solely on:

• Facts
• Evidence
• Applicable law

This commitment reflects the importance of judicial independence in any democratic society.

The Need for Legal Reforms in Pakistan

While discussing the future of the legal system, Judge Sheikh Sajjad highlighted several areas requiring reform.

Road Accident Laws

According to him, Pakistan’s legal framework concerning road accidents remains outdated.

He believes victims should receive stronger legal protection and compensation.

Modern laws should provide:

• Faster compensation mechanisms.
• Greater accountability for negligent drivers.
• Improved victim support systems.
• More effective assessment of damages.

As road accidents continue to increase, modernization in this area has become increasingly important.

Reforming Stay Orders and Injunctions

Another issue identified by Judge Sheikh Sajjad concerns temporary injunctions and stay orders.

He noted that courts often rely heavily on affidavits when granting interim relief.

Unfortunately, affidavits may sometimes be misused.

To address this issue, he suggested:

• Stronger evidentiary requirements.
• More rigorous scrutiny.
• Faster disposal of injunction-related cases.
• Reduced opportunities for procedural abuse.

Such reforms could significantly reduce unnecessary delays in civil litigation.

Advice to Young Lawyers

Toward the conclusion of the interview, Judge Sheikh Sajjad shared valuable guidance for aspiring lawyers.

His advice was simple yet profound.

Develop Patience

Legal success rarely arrives overnight. Persistence and patience are essential qualities.

Exercise Self-Control

Lawyers must remain professional even in difficult circumstances.

Respect the Rule of Law

The legal profession exists to strengthen, not weaken, the justice system.

Support the Oppressed

Lawyers should stand with those seeking justice rather than merely aligning themselves with power and influence.

Prioritize Justice

Personal gain should never outweigh ethical responsibilities.

These principles represent the foundation of a respected legal career.

Lessons from More Than Two Decades on the Bench

The career of Judge Sheikh Sajjad offers several important lessons:

• Integrity is the cornerstone of judicial service.
• Justice depends upon evidence, not emotion.
• Due process protects society as well as individuals.
• Judicial independence must be preserved at all costs.
• Legal reforms are necessary for improving public confidence.
• Lawyers and judges share responsibility for maintaining the rule of law.

His reflections demonstrate that the pursuit of justice requires courage, discipline, and an unwavering commitment to fairness.