About case laws on partial partition of joint properties
About case laws on partial partition of joint properties
Blog Article
“There is not any ocular evidence to show that Muhammad Abbas was murdered by any with the present petitioners. Mere fact that Noor Muhammad and Muhammad Din observed firstly the deceased and after a ways they saw the petitioners going towards the same direction, did not necessarily mean that the petitioners were chasing the deceased or were accompanying him. These kinds of evidence cannot be treated as evidence of past noticed.
ninety three . Const. P. 642/2023 (D.B.) Fatima Noor V/S Dow University of Health Science and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi Coming towards the main case, It's also a perfectly-recognized proposition of regulation that when an inquiry is conducted on charges of misconduct by a public servant, the Court is concerned with determining whether the inquiry was held by a competent officer or whether rules of natural justice are complied with. Whether the findings or conclusions are based on some evidence, the authority entrusted with the power to hold inquiry has jurisdiction, power, and authority to reach a finding of fact or conclusion. But that finding must be based on some evidence. Neither the technical rules nor proof of the fact or evidence while in the Stricto-Sensu, apply to disciplinary proceedings. When the authority accepts that evidence and conclusion receive support therefrom, the disciplinary authority is entitled to hold that the delinquent officer is guilty with the charge, however, that is subject matter for the procedure provided under the relevant rules and not otherwise, for that reason that the Court in its power of judicial review does not work as appellate authority to re-respect the evidence and to reach at its independent findings around the evidence.
V) During investigation, the Investigating Officer concluded that fire-arm injury which was fatal to your deceased was caused from the petitioner but in support of opinion in the Investigating Officer no iota of evidence is obtainable around the file and mere ipsi dixit of police isn't binding to the Court.
Matter:-SERVICE Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Creator) Const. P. 5066/2024 (D.B.) Ayaz Hussain and 432 Others V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi SHC Citation: SHC-224033 Tag:Given the legal analysis on the topic issue, we have been with the view that the claim with the petitioners for retroactive regularization from their Preliminary contract appointment and seniority and promotion thereon, from that angle just isn't legally audio, Aside from promotion and seniority, not absolute rights, These are matter to rules and regulations If your recruitment rules of the subject post allow the case with the petitioners for promotion could be deemed, however, we've been apparent in our point of view that contractual service cannot be regarded for seniority and promotion because the seniority is reckoned from the date of regular appointment and promotion depends upon seniority cum Physical fitness, issue to availability of vacancy subject matter into the approval of the competent authority.
Make use of the PACER Case Locator if you are not guaranteed which specific federal court the case was filed. You may also conduct nationwide searches to determine whether or not a party is involved in a very federal case. This database updates at midnight daily.
Reasonable grounds are offered around the record get more info to connect the petitioner with the commission of the alleged offence. However punishment with the alleged offence does not slide in the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. still figured out Deputy Prosecutor General apprises that another case of similar nature arising from FIR No. 1250/2024 dated ten.05.2024 registered under Section 489-File, PPC at Police Station Haji Pura, District Sialkot is in the credit of the petitioner as accused, therefore, case of your petitioner falls during the exception where bail cannot be granted even in the cases not falling within the ambit of prohibition contained in Section 497, Cr.P.C. In this regard, advice is sought from the case of “Muhammad Imran versus The State and others” (PLD 2021 Supreme Court 903); relevant portion in the same is hereby reproduced:
be founded without an iota of doubt in all other jurisdictions) will be inferred. This is a horrifying reality, a very minimal threshold for an offence that carries capital punishment.
In any society, the enforcement of law and order is essential to maintain peace and protect its citizens. One of the most serious crimes that can disrupt this harmony is murder. In Pakistan, Section 302 on the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) deals with the punishment for murder, and its enforcement is critical to make certain justice prevails.
Case law, also used interchangeably with common regulation, can be a legislation that is based on precedents, that is the judicial decisions from previous cases, instead than regulation based on constitutions, statutes, or regulations. Case law uses the detailed facts of the legal case that have been resolved by courts or similar tribunals.
I) The above mentioned referred case FIR, with the murder of deceased namely Muhammad Sajjad, was registered around the complaint of Muhammad Sharif son of Ghulam Farid that is father in the petitioner and According to story of FIR, the petitioner is an eyewkness of your event.
Legal Defenses: An accused person charged under Section 302 PPC can present legal defenses including self-defense, insanity, or accidental killing, which may cause reduced charges or acquittal.
, which is Latin for “stand by decided matters.” This means that a court will be bound to rule in accordance with a previously made ruling within the same type of case.
Search for websites affiliated with trustworthy legal institutions or organizations. Verify the information against other sources when possible.
The decision further directed the government of Pakistan to establish a commission of internationally known and regarded researchers to review and rule on long term grid station projects. In addition, the Court ordered WAPDA to immediately introduce public consultation and objection procedures for all projects concerning grid stations and power lines.