five. Discovered Deputy Prosecutor General together with counsel for the complainant further argued that during the investigation of your case the petitioner Mst. Mubeena Bibi led for the recovery of sleeping capsules on 14.02.2018. The report of Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore continues to be made before the Court wherein the sleeping pills were declared to be comprising “Alprazolam and Procyclidin” whereas “Diazepam” and “Chloroquin” were detected while in the liver but not in the tummy. As a result, the recovery of stated sleeping tablets hardly connects the petitioner Mst. Mubeena Bibi with the crime complained of. Acquired Deputy Prosecutor General as well as counsel with the complainant have also argued that during the investigation on the case the petitioner Bhoora led on the recovery of a motorcycle.
“The evidence regarding wajtakkar and extra-judicial confession being relied upon from the prosecution against the petitioner and his above mentioned co-accused namely Hussain Bakhsh has already been opined via the Lahore High Court, Lahore in its order dated 2-twelve-2010 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.
limitation of liability into the extent of a cap provided with the registered mortgage deed(Banking Regulation)
Information on accessing opinions and case-related documents with the Supreme Court of your United States is accessible over the court’s website.
3. I have read the discovered counsel for that parties and have long gone through the record of this case with their in a position assistance.
This Court may well interfere where the authority held the proceedings against the delinquent officer in a very fashion inconsistent with the rules of natural justice or in violation of statutory rules prescribing the method of inquiry or where the summary or finding arrived at by the disciplinary authority is based on no evidence. When the conclusion or finding is like no reasonable person would have ever arrived at, the Court may perhaps interfere with the summary or the finding and mildew the relief to really make it proper into the facts of each and every case. In service jurisprudence, the disciplinary authority is the sole judge of facts. Where the appeal is presented, the appellate authority has coextensive power to re-value the evidence or perhaps the nature of punishment. Over the aforesaid proposition, we've been fortified by the decision from the Supreme Court in the case of Ghulam Murtaza Shaikh v. Chief Minister Sindh (2024 SCMR 1757). Read more
only around the ground of get more info miscases remanded & only over the ground of misreading of evidence only within the ground of misreading of evidence . disposed of(Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979)
Extra username and password are needed for this resource. See Username and password webpage for details
Civil Courts retain jurisdiction over title disputes in partition matters. Agreement to sell does not confer title; it involves legal transfer of title. Agreement to sell must be created and properly exhibited in evidence. Declining relief based on an unproduced and un-exhibited sale agreement is legally unsustainable. Read more
acquitted the appellants from many of the charges therefore the same is dismissed being infructuous. (Criminal Revision )
Case regulation, also known as precedent, forms the foundation of the Pakistani legal system. Understanding relevant judgments and rulings is very important for interpreting statutes and predicting legal results. Free access to those resources democratizes legal knowledge, empowering citizens and selling transparency.
one. Judicial Independence: The court emphasized the importance of judicial independence as well as separation of powers.
In case the employee fails to serve a grievance notice, the NIRC may possibly dismiss the grievance petition. This is because the employer hasn't had an opportunity to respond to the grievance and attempt to resolve it. In certain cases, the NIRC may perhaps allow the employee to amend the grievance petilion to include the grievance notice. However, this is frequently only performed When the employee can show that that they had a good reason for not serving the grievance notice. During the present case, the parties were allowed to lead evidence and also the petitioner company responded into the allegations therefore they were perfectly aware about the allegations and led the evidence therefore this point is ofno use for being looked into in constitutional jurisdiction at this stage. Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Writer), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Abdur Rahman Source: Order: Downloads 173 Order Date: 04-FEB-25 Approved for Reporting WhatsApp
competent authority has determined the eligibility in the private respondents and found them to generally be match for promotion. CP dismissed(Promotion)