Summary
- KARACHI: A decade-old commercial transaction involving the reported sale of black scorpions to a German company has become the subject of a major banking dispute before the Sindh High Court, where four Pakistani claimants are seeking access to funds they say were never delivered to their accounts.
- Documents cited by Minute Mirror indicate that the dispute concerns a transaction dated December 9, 2014 involving a German firm identified as SAT IN LLC.
- Their counsel Advocate Sajid Mahboob told the court that the dispute originated from an international commercial arrangement involving the supply of black scorpions under an agreement signed by Pakistani representatives and a manager of the German company.
KARACHI: A decade-old commercial transaction involving the reported sale of black scorpions to a German company has become the subject of a major banking dispute before the Sindh High Court, where four Pakistani claimants are seeking access to funds they say were never delivered to their accounts.
Documents cited by Minute Mirror indicate that the dispute concerns a transaction dated December 9, 2014 involving a German firm identified as SAT IN LLC. The petitioners claim that the money was intended to reach Pakistan through formal banking channels but remains unresolved.
The matter is pending before the Constitutional Bench in Constitutional Petition No. D-4980 of 2026. The court has not yet ruled on the underlying claims.
According to the order sheet dated September 9, 2026 the petition was filed by Juma Khan Muhammad Siddique, Allah Razi and Riaz Ahmed residents of Quetta. They are represented through a special attorney Muhammad Arif Jamaldini.
Their counsel Advocate Sajid Mahboob told the court that the dispute originated from an international commercial arrangement involving the supply of black scorpions under an agreement signed by Pakistani representatives and a manager of the German company.
The court initially issued notices to the respondents. At the October 13 hearing representatives of the State Bank of Pakistan and private banks requested additional time to submit their replies. The bench granted them a further month.
A document attached to the petition reportedly records an agreement executed in Lahore on December 9, 2014. It identifies Muhammad Shafiq as one party and a representative of SAT IN LLC, Germany as the other.
The agreement describes the sale of two black scorpions with weights recorded as 715 grams and 340 grams. It lists the consideration as €464 million and refers to a telegraphic transfer through Barclays Bank in Germany.
The amount and the claimed transfer arrangements remain central to the dispute. Independent banking documentation would be needed to establish whether the transaction occurred as described and whether the stated funds entered Pakistan’s financial system.
A key passage in the court record states that the wider transaction involved 14 beneficiaries. According to the petition ten received their respective funds abroad while the four applicants chose to receive their payments through bank accounts in Pakistan.
The applicants argue that the relevant financial institutions failed to release the money or provide a satisfactory explanation despite repeated approaches to banks and regulatory authorities.
They have asked the court to require the banks to disclose transaction records, including SWIFT communications incoming remittance entries credit advice and correspondence with intermediary institutions.
The respondents include the State Bank of Pakistan, Dubai Islamic Bank Pakistan, United Bank Limited, Bank Alfalah and Standard Chartered Bank Pakistan. The Ministry of Finance is also identified in the supplied material.
The petitioners want an independent examination of the transaction protection of relevant physical and electronic records and appropriate directions concerning the disputed funds. They have also challenged what they describe as prolonged administrative inaction.
The transaction dates back to a period when black scorpion trading attracted attention in parts of Pakistan, including Thar, amid claims about the commercial value of scorpion venom. However, that background does not independently verify the particular agreement or the amount allegedly transferred.
The immediate legal issue is whether documentary evidence can establish the transaction’s financial trail and clarify the responsibilities of the institutions involved.
For now the case remains at the preliminary stage. The banks’ written responses and any authenticated transfer records are likely to be central to the next phase of proceedings.
The court has yet to determine whether the claimed funds were transferred received withheld or otherwise dealt with unlawfully.
