“There isn't any ocular evidence to show that Muhammad Abbas was murdered by any on the present petitioners. Mere fact that Noor Muhammad and Muhammad Din saw firstly the deceased and after far they noticed the petitioners going towards the same direction, didn't mean that the petitioners were chasing the deceased or were accompanying him. This kind of evidence cannot be treated as evidence of previous viewed.
The court emphasised that in cases of intentional murder, the gravity of the offense demands the most stringent punishment, contemplating the sanctity of human life and deterrence for prospective offenders.
four. It has been noticed by this Court that there is usually a delay of one day in the registration of FIR which has not been explained with the complainant. Moreover, there is not any eye-witness with the alleged prevalence plus the prosecution is counting on the witnesses of extra judicial confession. The evidence of extra judicial confession of the petitioners has been tendered by Ghulam Dastigir and Mohammad Akram through their statements recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C., on 06.02.2018. Both of these namely Ghulam Dastigir and Mohammad Akram transpired to get the real brothers from the deceased but they didn't respond in any respect to the confessional statements with the petitioners and calmly noticed them leaving, 1 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 14.02.2018 and there is not any explanation concerning why her arrest was not effected after making on the alleged extra judicial confession. It has been held on so many situations that extra judicial confession of an accused is a weak form of evidence which can be manoeuvred with the prosecution in almost any case where direct connecting evidence does not arrive their way. The prosecution is additionally relying on the evidence of Murid Hussain and Muhammad Afzal which is equally fragile, as both the witnesses Murid Hussain and Muhammad Afzal didn't say a word as to presence of some light with the place, where they allegedly observed the petitioners together on a motorcycle at 4.
The convictions and sentences Upheld, as misappropriation was committed while in the bank and given that only the appellants were posted at the relevant time .(Criminal Appeal )
Amir Abdul Majid, 2021 SCMR 420. twelve. There isn't any denial from the fact that in Government service it is expected that the persons acquiring their character previously mentioned board, free from any moral stigma, are to become inducted. Verification of character and antecedents is really a condition precedent for appointment to the Government service. The candidates must have good character and supply two recent character certificates from unrelated individuals. What is discernible from the above mentioned is that the only impediment to being appointed to some Government service is the conviction on an offense involving moral turpitude but involvement, which does not culminate into a proof by conviction, cannot be a method out or guise to try and do away with the candidature with the petitioner. Read more
The ICAP Staff Service Rules, 2011 were framed with the respondent/Institute, these rules might not have the operates within a clear legal and regulatory framework with the respondent/Institute. 14. In view of what has become discussed higher than, without touching the merits of the case, the preliminary objection regarding the maintainability in the petition is sustained as well as the petition is held to get not maintainable in terms of Article 199 on the Constitution for that reason that non???statutory rules of service cannot be enforced through writ of mandamus in terms of ratio in the judgment passed through the Supreme Court during the case of Pakistan Electric Power Company supra. Read more
73 . Const. get more info P. 288/2024 (D.B.) Engro Fertilizers Limited through Asad Shakil Khan V/S Full Bench of NIRC & others Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur Pertaining to the second issue of non-service of grievance notice. Under Section 33 from the Industrial Relations Ac1,2012 (lRA 2012), ifa grievance notice just isn't served, the grievance petition is often dismissed. This is because service of the grievance notice is actually a mandatory prerequisite and a precondition for filing a grievance petition. The regulation requires that a grievance notice be served within the employer before filing a grievance petition. This allows the employer to answer the grievance and attempt to resolve it amicably. If your employer fails to reply or resolve the grievance, the employee can then file a grievance petition with the National Industrial Relations Commission CNIRC) When the organization is transprovincial.
Some pluralist systems, which include Scots law in Scotland and types of civil legislation jurisdictions in Quebec and Louisiana, never precisely in shape into the dual common-civil regulation system classifications. These types of systems may well have been seriously influenced via the Anglo-American common legislation tradition; however, their substantive legislation is firmly rooted during the civil law tradition.
Accessing free case law sites in Pakistan is essential for legal professionals, students, and any one seeking to understand Pakistani legal precedents.
In Dosso's case (1958), the Pakistan Supreme Court used jurist Hans Kelsen's theory that a revolution might be justified when the basic norm underlying a Constitution disappears and also a new system is put in its place.
In the event the employee fails to serve a grievance notice, the NIRC may well dismiss the grievance petition. This is because the employer hasn't had a possibility to answer the grievance and attempt to resolve it. In certain cases, the NIRC may possibly allow the employee to amend the grievance petilion to include the grievance notice. However, this is often only accomplished Should the employee can show that that they had a good reason for not serving the grievance notice. While in the present case, the parties were allowed to steer evidence and the petitioner company responded towards the allegations as a result they were well mindful of the allegations and led the evidence as such this point is ofno use to get looked into in constitutional jurisdiction at this stage. Read more
This article delves into the intricacies of your recent amendment, accompanied by relevant case law, to supply a comprehensive understanding of its implications and functional applications.
Persuasive Authority – Prior court rulings that may very well be consulted in deciding a current case. It may be used to guide the court, but is not really binding precedent.
In determining whether employees of DCFS are entitled to absolute immunity, which is generally held by certain government officials performing within the scope of their employment, the appellate court referred to case regulation previously rendered on similar cases.