seventy seven . Const. P. 3670/2023 (D.B.) Rehan Pervez V/S Fed. of Pakistan and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi First and foremost, we would address the issue of maintainability of the instant Petition under Article 199 in the Constitution based around the doctrine of laches as this petition was filed in 2016, whereas the alleged cause of action accrued for the petitioner in 1992. The petitioner asserts that he pursued his legal remedy just after involvement inside the FIR lodged by FIA and from the intervening period the respondent dismissed him from service where after he preferred petition No.
The main target is to the intention to cause injury. This is often a major trouble: an especially very low threshold for an offence carrying the death penalty.
4. It has been noticed by this Court that there is often a delay of someday from the registration of FIR which hasn't been explained by the complainant. Moreover, there isn't any eye-witness of the alleged occurrence as well as the prosecution is depending on the witnesses of extra judicial confession. The evidence of extra judicial confession from the petitioners has long been tendered by Ghulam Dastigir and Mohammad Akram through their statements recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C., on 06.02.2018. Both of them namely Ghulam Dastigir and Mohammad Akram transpired to become the real brothers of the deceased but they didn't respond in any respect to the confessional statements in the petitioners and calmly saw them leaving, a person after the other, without even moving an inch. They have not mentioned in their statements that the accused held some weapon when they visited them to confess their guilt about the murder of Ghulam Farid which could have precluded these witnesses from apprehending the petitioners. Their conduct does not appear much inspiring or natural. The petitioner, namely, Mst. Mubeena Bibi was arrested on fourteen.02.2018 and there isn't any explanation regarding why her arrest was not effected after making from the alleged extra judicial confession. It has been held on countless instances that extra judicial confession of an accused can be a weak type of evidence which may very well be manoeuvred through the prosecution in almost any case where direct connecting evidence does not appear their way. The prosecution is additionally depending on the evidence of Murid Hussain and Muhammad Afzal which is equally fragile, as both the witnesses Murid Hussain and Muhammad Afzal did not say a word regarding existence of some light at the place, where they allegedly noticed the petitioners together on a motorcycle at four.
Commonly, the burden rests with litigants to appeal rulings (like Individuals in distinct violation of established case legislation) on the higher courts. If a judge acts against precedent, and also the case is just not appealed, the decision will stand.
“Making sure the precision of legal information is paramount,” says Barrister Ayesha Khan, a leading legal expert in Lahore. “Cross-referencing information from multiple dependable sources is essential for reliable legal research.”
کیا ایف آئی آر درخواست گزار کی رپورٹ پر درج کی گئی تھی اور اگر ہاں تو کیا اسے اس کے خلاف ثبوت کے طور پر استعمال کیا جا سکتا ہے؟
(Interview by email, with Ahmad Rafay Alam, a leading environmental lawyer and activist in Pakistan, August twenty eighth, 2015). Furthermore, the ruling placed a notice and comment restriction on government agencies in regards to projects that could potentially pose a public risk. This case is usually noteworthy, “because it laid down the foundations of all foreseeable future public interest litigation brought before courts for environmental protection.” To cite just one example, following this case, the Supreme Court, citing the Zia decision, found while in the Salt Miners Case (decided on 12th July, 1994) that the right to have water free from pollution and contamination is often a right to life itself.
لاہور ہائیکورٹ نے قرار دیا ہے کہ پاکستان میں لوگوں کو جھوٹے مقدمات میں ملوث کر دینے کی شکایت عام ہے عدالت نے حکم جاری کیا ہے................
Ordinarily, only an appeal accepted because of the court of very last vacation resort will resolve this kind of differences and, For several reasons, this sort of appeals are frequently not granted.
two. I have listened to the acquired counsel for the parties as well as learned DPG at length, perused the record and noticed that:-
Using keywords effectively is usually critical. Think about using synonyms and variations of your keywords to make sure you seize all relevant results. Understanding the citation system used by Pakistani courts will also help you pinpoint specific cases.
Article 199 in the Constitution allows High Court intervention only when "no other suitable remedy is provided by regulation." It is read more properly-settled that an aggrieved person must exhaust obtainable remedies before invoking High Court jurisdiction, regardless of whether those remedies suit them. The doctrine of exhaustion of remedies prevents unnecessary High Court litigation. Read more
In case the employee fails to provide a grievance notice, the NIRC may dismiss the grievance petition. This is because the employer has not had a chance to answer the grievance and attempt to resolve it. In a few cases, the NIRC may well allow the employee to amend the grievance petilion to include the grievance notice. However, this is usually only done If your employee can show that they'd a good reason for not serving the grievance notice. From the present case, the parties were allowed to lead evidence plus the petitioner company responded for the allegations as such they were nicely mindful of the allegations and led the evidence therefore this point is ofno use to be looked into in constitutional jurisdiction at this stage. Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Creator), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Abdur Rahman Source: Order: Downloads 173 Order Date: 04-FEB-twenty five Approved for Reporting WhatsApp
The residents argued that the high-voltage grid station would pose a health risk and likely hazard to local residents. Eventually, the court determined the scientific evidence inconclusive, although observing the general trend supports that electromagnetic fields have destructive effects on human health. The Court accepted the petitioner’s argument that it should adopt the precautionary principle established out from the 1992 Rio Declaration over the Environment and Advancement, the first international instrument that linked environment protection with human rights, whereby the lack of full scientific certainty should not be used being a reason to prevent environmental degradation.