New Step by Step Map For speaker production order jurisdiction case law in india
New Step by Step Map For speaker production order jurisdiction case law in india
Blog Article
“There isn't any ocular evidence to show that Muhammad Abbas was murdered by any in the present petitioners. Mere fact that Noor Muhammad and Muhammad Din noticed firstly the deceased and after a long way they noticed the petitioners going towards the same direction, didn't indicate that the petitioners were chasing the deceased or were accompanying him. This kind of evidence cannot be treated as evidence of very last noticed.
93 . Const. P. 642/2023 (D.B.) Fatima Noor V/S Dow University of Health Science and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi Coming on the main case, It is usually a nicely-proven proposition of legislation 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 achieve 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 during 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 on the charge, however, that is topic for the procedure provided under the relevant rules rather than otherwise, to the reason that the Court in its power of judicial review does not work as appellate authority to re-recognize the evidence and to arrive at its independent findings around the evidence.
This Court may 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 manner of inquiry or where the conclusion or finding attained by the disciplinary authority is based on no evidence. If your conclusion or finding is such as no reasonable person would have ever arrived at, the Court may possibly interfere with the summary or the finding and mildew the relief to make it proper on the facts of each case. In service jurisprudence, the disciplinary authority could be the sole judge of facts. Where the appeal is presented, the appellate authority has coextensive power to re-respect the evidence or the nature of punishment. To the aforesaid proposition, we are fortified because of the decision with the Supreme Court while in 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(Creator) Source: Order: website Downloads 252 Order Date: 24-JAN-twenty five Approved for Reporting WhatsApp
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؟
3. I have listened to the realized counsel for your parties and have long gone through the record of this case with their capable assistance.
Reasonable grounds can be found about the record to attach the petitioner with the commission with the alleged offence. Nevertheless punishment on the alleged offence does not fall inside the prohibitory clause of Section 497, Cr.P.C. nevertheless acquired Deputy Prosecutor General apprises that another case of similar nature arising out of FIR No. 1250/2024 dated 10.05.2024 registered under Section 489-File, PPC at Police Station Haji Pura, District Sialkot is from the credit in the petitioner as accused, therefore, case from the petitioner falls while in the exception where bail cannot be granted even during the cases not falling within the ambit of prohibition contained in Section 497, Cr.P.C. In this regard, direction is sought from the case of “Muhammad Imran versus The State and others” (PLD 2021 Supreme Court 903); relevant portion with the same is hereby reproduced:
The reason for this difference is that these civil law jurisdictions adhere to the tradition that the reader should manage to deduce the logic from the decision as well as statutes.[4]
The appellant should have remained vigilant and raised his challenge to the Judgment within time. Read more
Accessing free case law sites in Pakistan is essential for legal professionals, students, and anyone seeking to understand Pakistani legal precedents.
If granted absolute immunity, the parties would not only be protected from liability inside the matter, but could not be answerable in any way for their actions. When the court delayed making this type of ruling, the defendants took their request on the appellate court.
Legal Defenses: An accused person charged under Section 302 PPC can present legal defenses such as self-defense, insanity, or accidental killing, which might cause reduced charges or acquittal.
1. Judicial Independence: The court emphasised the importance of judicial independence and also the separation of powers.
If your employee fails to provide a grievance notice, the NIRC may perhaps dismiss the grievance petition. This is because the employer has not experienced an opportunity to respond to the grievance and attempt to resolve it. In some cases, the NIRC could allow the employee to amend the grievance petilion to incorporate the grievance notice. However, this is frequently only finished If your employee can show that that they had a good reason for not serving the grievance notice. Within the present case, the parties were allowed to guide evidence and the petitioner company responded into the allegations as a result they were very well aware about the allegations and led the evidence therefore this point is ofno use being seemed into in constitutional jurisdiction at this stage. Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author), Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Abdur Rahman Source: Order: Downloads 173 Order Date: 04-FEB-twenty five Approved for Reporting WhatsApp
In determining whether employees of DCFS are entitled to absolute immunity, which is generally held by certain government officials acting within the scope of their employment, the appellate court referred to case regulation previously rendered on similar cases.