5. Discovered Deputy Prosecutor General and counsel for the complainant further argued that during the investigation of your case the petitioner Mst. Mubeena Bibi led towards the recovery of sleeping supplements on 14.02.2018. The report of Punjab Forensic Science Agency, Lahore continues to be manufactured before the Court wherein the sleeping pills were declared to be comprising “Alprazolam and Procyclidin” whereas “Diazepam” and “Chloroquin” were detected within the liver but not inside the tummy. Hence, the recovery of mentioned sleeping tablets hardly connects the petitioner Mst. Mubeena Bibi with the crime complained of. Uncovered Deputy Prosecutor General along with counsel for the complainant have also argued that during the investigation of your case the petitioner Bhoora led to your recovery of a motorcycle.
one zero one . H.C.A 203/2016 (D.B.) Saleh Muhammad V/S Faqir Muhammad & others Sindh High Court, Karachi Topic: Appeal At times it really is effortless to get a Judge to dismiss the suit for non-prosecution, however, a Judge is under the obligation to create an attempt to get rid of a case on advantage and more importantly when after recording of evidence it's reached to your stage of final arguments, endeavors should be made for advantage disposal when it has reached this sort of stage. Read more
Google Scholar – a vast database of state and federal case regulation, which is searchable by keyword, phrase, or citations. Google Scholar also allows searchers to specify which level of court cases to search, from federal, to specific states.
Subscription access exclusively for organizations/businesses (SCC ID necessary) to criminal and traffic case information in the general district courts for your purpose of confirming an individual’s date of birth.
criminal revision application is dismissed. reduced towards the period of his detention in jail he has already undergone(Criminal Revision )
This Court could interfere where the authority held the proceedings against the delinquent officer within a manner inconsistent with the rules of natural justice or in violation of statutory rules prescribing the manner of inquiry or where the summary or finding achieved through the disciplinary authority is based on no evidence. If your conclusion or finding is including no reasonable person would have ever attained, the Court may well interfere with the conclusion or maybe the finding and mold the relief to make it correct into the facts of each case. In service jurisprudence, the disciplinary authority will be the sole judge of facts. Where the appeal is presented, the appellate authority has coextensive power to re-value the evidence or maybe the nature of punishment. Within the aforesaid proposition, we are fortified via the decision from the Supreme Court in the case of Ghulam Murtaza Shaikh v. Chief Minister Sindh (2024 SCMR 1757). Read more
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................
Section 302 of your PPC outlines the punishment for “Qatl-i-Amd” (intentional murder) in Pakistan. According to this provision, if a person intentionally causes the death of another individual, they shall be topic towards the most severe form of punishment permissible under Pakistani law.
In simple terms, the section states that any person who commits intentional murder shall be subjected to the death penalty or life imprisonment, along with a potential fine.
Doing a case law search could possibly be as easy as moving into specific keywords or citation into a search engine. There are, however, certain websites that facilitate case legislation searches, including:
To invoke section 300 and 302 just because death has occurred is the largest tragedy of all. It does the precise opposite of what a legal system is there to do, i.e. protected its citizens.
A coalition of residents sent a letter of petition on the Supreme Court to challenge the Water and Power Enhancement Authority’s (WAPDA) construction of an electricity grid station in their community, on designated “green belt” property. The Court heard get more info the matter as a human rights case, as Article 184 (3) of the Pakistan Constitution supplies primary jurisdiction to the Supreme Court to choose up and determine any matter concerning the enforcement of fundamental rights of public importance.
P.C. for grant of post arrest bail should also be dismissed. Suffice is to watch that that considerations for pre- arrest and post-arrest bail are totally different. Reliance in this regard is placed on case legislation titled as “Shah Nawaz v. The State” 2005 SCMR 1899” wherein it's been held by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan as under:--