refers to a landmark case decided because of the Supreme Court of Pakistan in 2012. Listed here’s a brief overview:

In other circumstances as discussed supra pensionary benefits cannot be stopped on account of criminal charges after the retirement of two years; and, is violative on the regulation laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Haji Muhammad Ismail Memon, PLD 2007 SC 35. Consequently, the competent authority of the parent department on the petitioner as well as Chief Secretary, Sindh, are liable to release the pensionary amount of your petitioner and pay the pension amount and other ancillary benefits towards the petitioner to which he is entitled under the legislation within two months from the date of receipt of this order. The competent authority of your respondent can also be directed to recalculate the pensionary benefits in the petitioner and increases accrued thereon the withheld pensionary benefits with effect from stopping to date. Read more

four.  It's been noticed by this Court that there can be a delay of one day in the registration of FIR which has not been explained with the complainant. Moreover, there is no eye-witness in the alleged incidence plus the prosecution is depending on the witnesses of extra judicial confession. The evidence of extra judicial confession with the petitioners has become tendered by Ghulam Dastigir and Mohammad Akram through their statements recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C., on 06.02.2018. Both of them namely Ghulam Dastigir and Mohammad Akram transpired to get the real brothers with the deceased but they didn't respond in the slightest degree to the confessional statements with the petitioners and calmly observed them leaving, just one 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 glimpse much inspiring or natural. The petitioner, namely, Mst. Mubeena Bibi was arrested on fourteen.02.2018 and there is not any explanation as to why her arrest wasn't effected after making of your alleged extra judicial confession. It has been held on numerous situations that extra judicial confession of an accused is usually a weak form of evidence which could be manoeuvred from the prosecution in almost any case where direct connecting evidence does not arrive their way. The prosecution is also counting 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 concerning presence of some light within the place, where they allegedly observed the petitioners collectively on a motorcycle at 4.

The former means “guilty act” and the latter means “guilty mind.” With the omission of the intention, the commission of the act by yourself just isn't more than enough to gain a conviction for that crime. This is often a simple principle that all regulation students are very well acquainted with.

Because of their position between the two main systems of legislation, these types of legal systems are sometimes referred to as combined systems of regulation.

Matter:-SERVICE Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Creator) Const. P. 642/2023 (D.B.) Fatima Noor V/S Dow University of Health Science and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi SHC Citation: SHC-225471 Tag:Coming to the main case, Additionally it is a very well-founded proposition of law 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 the 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 of the charge, however, that is issue on the procedure provided under the relevant rules rather than otherwise, for that reason that the Court in its power of judicial review does not act as appellate authority to re-respect the evidence and to reach at its independent findings about the evidence.

Allow’s deal with what the Prosecution must prove in order to gain a conviction. There are four elements that must be proven.

Binding Precedent – A rule or principle founded by a court, which other courts are obligated to adhere to.

nine.  Needless to mention that any observations made in the above mentioned order are tentative in nature and shall not influence the trial Court.

I)       The above referred case FIR, for your murder of deceased namely Muhammad Sajjad, was registered over the complaint of Muhammad Sharif son of Ghulam Farid who's father on the petitioner and According to story of FIR, the petitioner is surely an eyewkness with the occurrence.

The scrupulous reader might have noticed a little something previously mentioned: a flaw. Past the first 7 words, the definition focuses within the intention to cause “Injury,” not the intention to cause death. The two basic elements that must be proven in order to convict a person of the crime are “

Article 199 of your Constitution allows High Court intervention only when "no other satisfactory remedy is provided by legislation." It truly is effectively-settled that an aggrieved person must exhaust offered remedies before invoking High Court jurisdiction, regardless of whether People remedies suit them. The doctrine of exhaustion of remedies prevents unnecessary High Court litigation. Read more

If the employee fails to serve a grievance notice, the NIRC may possibly dismiss the grievance petition. This is because the employer hasn't had a chance 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 include the grievance notice. However, this is often only finished If your employee can show that that they had a good reason for not serving the grievance notice. During the present case, the parties were allowed to steer evidence as well as petitioner company responded on the allegations as a result they were properly aware of the allegations and led the evidence therefore this point is ofno use to generally be 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

14. Inside the light on the position explained over, it really is concluded that a civil servant includes a fundamental right to get promoted even after his retirement by awarding proforma promotion; provided, his right of promotion accrued during his service read more but could not be regarded as for no fault of his personal and In the meantime he retired on attaining the age of superannuation without any shortcoming on his part about deficiency in the duration of service or from the form of inquiry and departmental action was so taken against his right of promotion. Read more