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................
93 . Const. P. 642/2023 (D.B.) Fatima Noor V/S Dow University of Health Science and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi Coming into the main case, It is additionally a effectively-established 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 summary. But that finding must be based on some evidence. Neither the technical rules nor proof of a fact or evidence within the Stricto-Sensu, utilize to disciplinary proceedings. When the authority accepts that evidence and conclusion get support therefrom, the disciplinary authority is entitled to hold that the delinquent officer is guilty in the charge, however, that is subject on the procedure provided under the relevant rules and not otherwise, for the reason that the Court in its power of judicial review does not work as appellate authority to re-appreciate the evidence and to reach at its independent findings about the evidence.
This Court could interfere where the authority held the proceedings against the delinquent officer in a way inconsistent with the rules of natural justice or in violation of statutory rules prescribing the mode of inquiry or where the summary or finding achieved with the disciplinary authority is based on no evidence. In the event the summary or finding is like no reasonable person would have ever attained, the Court may perhaps interfere with the conclusion or maybe the finding and mold the relief to really make it appropriate towards the facts of each 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-enjoy the evidence or the nature of punishment. On the aforesaid proposition, we've been fortified because of the decision from the Supreme Court during the case of Ghulam Murtaza Shaikh v. Chief Minister Sindh (2024 SCMR 1757). Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author) Source: Order: Downloads 252 Order Date: 24-JAN-25 Approved for Reporting WhatsApp
Some bodies are supplied statutory powers to issue steering with persuasive authority or similar statutory effect, including the Highway Code.
Individual researchers working on defined research projects supposed for scholarly work can utilize the connected form (PDF) to request PACER price exemptions from multiple courts.
Please use 1 username and password established from the options. If it does not work please consider the other. Each and every allows single user access only - so please remember to log off properly when you have concluded your session in Manupatra.
only over the ground of miscases remanded & only around the ground of misreading of evidence only around the ground of misreading of evidence . disposed of(Sindh Rented Premises Ordinance, 1979)
whether although granting promotion senior employees were regarded for promotion or otherwise and submit the compliance report.(Promotion)
Case legislation, also used interchangeably with common law, can be a law that is based on precedents, that is definitely 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.
Therefore, case law australia this petition is found to generally be not maintainable and is particularly dismissed along with the pending application(s), plus the petitioners may well search for remedies through the civil court process as discussed supra. Read more
Criminal cases Inside the common legislation tradition, courts decide the law applicable to some case by interpreting statutes and applying precedents which record how and why prior cases have been decided. Not like most civil law systems, common law systems follow the doctrine of stare decisis, by which most courts are bound by their have previous decisions in similar cases. According to stare decisis, all lessen courts should make decisions constant with the previous decisions of higher courts.
In order to prove murder, there should be an intention to cause the death of that person along with the action of actually injuring them – and that injury subsequently leading to and causing the death of that person.
P.C. for grant of post arrest bail should also be dismissed. Suffice is to look at that that considerations for pre- arrest and post-arrest bail are fully different. Reliance in this regard is placed on case law titled as “Shah Nawaz v. The State” 2005 SCMR 1899” wherein it has been held via the august Supreme Court of Pakistan as under:--