Summary: Acquittal granted----Against judgment dated 26.6.19 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate -West, ICT, whereby respondent no.2 to 9 have been acquitted in case FIR No.70 dated 25.2.12 U/S 379/427/148/149/337 -H(ii) PPC P.S Tarnol (a) Legal Principles Relating to Acquittal Appeals: The legal principles governing appeals against acquittal were reaffirmed, including the presumption of innocence, the reluctance of appellate courts to interfere unless the acquittal is clearly unjustifiable, and the need for overwhelming proof to interfere with a trial court’s acquittal (referencing: Muhammad Shahbaz Ali Khalid v. The State [2019 SCMR 2012] and Hakim Khan v. The State [2013 SCMR 698]). (b) Benefit of Doubt in Criminal Cases: It was emphasized that in criminal cases, where the prosecution's evidence is fraught with doubts and discrepancies, the accused are entitled to the benefit of doubt. The acquittal of the respondents was based on the failure of the prosecution to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, particularly in the absence of corroborating evidence and the untrustworthiness of key witnesses. (c) Evidentiary Gaps and Failure of the Prosecution: The judgment underscored that the prosecution’s failure to produce material evidence—such as the recovered arms, vehicle, and forensic confirmation of the aerial firing—led to the acquittal. The witnesses' testimony was discredited due to their familial relations with the complainant, rendering them unreliable. Additionally, the absence of private witnesses and documentary evidence undermined the credibility of the prosecution’s case. (d) Importance of Substantiating Claims with Evidence: The case highlighted the necessity of supporting claims with documentary and physical evidence, particularly in land ownership disputes. The complainant’s admission of uncertainty about the land's ownership and lack of documentary proof weakened the case. (e) Role of Non-Production of Case Property: The prosecution’s failure to produce recovered case property (pistols, vehicle) before the trial court further weakened its case. The non-production of crucial evidence was a critical factor in the acquittal, as it failed to substantiate the allegations of theft and aerial firing. (f) Acquittal of Respondent No. 9: The acquittal of respondent No. 9 was upheld, noting that no specific allegations or evidence were presented against him to substantiate his involvement in the crime. -----Disposition: The appeal was dismissed, affirming the acquittal of the accused. The judgment of the learned Trial Court was upheld, as it was not found to suffer from any illegality or irregularity.

Summary: Bail after arrest in NAB reference

Summary: Quashment of FIR No.235/19 dated 29.6.19 U/S 354/452/506 PPC P.S Sihala ICT.

Summary: At the very outset, a copy of judgment of the august Supreme Court dated 21.11.2019, delivered in Civil Petitions No.4376 to 4440 to 4447, 5015 of 2018 & 298 of 2019 wherein amongst others, the judgment of this Court delivered in WP No.347-B/2016 dated 22.11.2017, was upheld, therefore, we, without dilating upon the merit of the instant case and in the interest of justice, would like to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner strictly in accordance with the guidelines laid down in the judgments supra.

Summary: Civil Procedure Code CPC---Registered instruments would stand against oral andunregistered instruments.

Summary: The case involved a dispute over the validity of a marriage between the petitioner and respondent No.3. The petitioner claims that no valid Sharai marriage took place, while respondent No.3 contends that the marriage was consummated. The court observeed inconsistencies in the petitioner's stance, such as opposing the comparison of signatures on the Nikah Nama and resisting a virginity test after initially proposing it. The court also noted the petitioner's refusal to recognize herself in photographs of the alleged marriage. The petitioner questions the authenticity of the Nikah Nama, citing the mention of a different address. However, the court finds that the petitioner failed to establish her presence elsewhere on the specified date. The court emphasized that trivial irregularities cannot invalidate a marriage supported by a Nikah Nama. The court dismissed the petition, stating that the evidence presented by the petitioner does not prove the marriage was void or invalid. It also rejected the petitioner's argument against media content, suggesting that such issues be addressed through the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA).

Summary: Background:Ruqia Islam, a successful candidate for the post of Educators in a government school, was denied assumption of charge at a Boys High School based on a policy prohibiting female candidates from applying for positions in Boys High/Higher Secondary Schools.She challenged this denial through a writ petition, which was upheld by the High Court, directing the department to consider her appointment.The Province of Punjab appealed this decision, arguing that the High Court had no jurisdiction to interfere with administrative policies.---Issues:Whether the High Court had jurisdiction to direct the department to accommodate the respondent in a Boys High School.Whether the policy prohibiting female candidates from applying for positions in Boys High/Higher Secondary Schools is discriminatory and against constitutional principles.---Outcome:The court held that the High Court had jurisdiction to intervene when administrative policies are inconsistent with constitutional principles.The policy prohibiting female candidates from applying for positions in Boys High/Higher Secondary Schools was deemed discriminatory and retrogressive, violating constitutional commands of equality and non-discrimination.The appeal was dismissed, affirming the High Court's decision.

Summary: Background: This case involves the acquisition of land by WAPDA for the Mangla Dam Raising Project. The acquired land belonged to the respondents, and the Collector Land Acquisition determined compensation at varying rates depending on the type of land. The landowners were dissatisfied with the compensation, prompting them to file a reference before the Reference Judge, who enhanced the compensation to Rs. 8,00,000 per kanal, regardless of land type. Both WAPDA and the landowners appealed to the High Court, which upheld the Reference Judge's decision. WAPDA then filed this appeal before the Supreme Court of Azad Jammu & Kashmir. ------Issues: 1- Was it legally justified to enhance compensation without considering land classifications? -----2- Did the Reference Judge act correctly by awarding a uniform compensation rate irrespective of land types? -----3- Did the landowners prove their claim that the entire land was agricultural, and the division into various types was unjustified? -----4- Did the Collector violate established principles for determining the market value of land? ------Holding/Reasoning/Outcome: The Supreme Court of AJK dismissed the appeal filed by WAPDA, finding that the Reference Judge's enhancement of compensation was justified and supported by evidence. The key reasoning includes: The landowners claimed that the acquired land was used for agricultural purposes, and the Collector’s division into types was incorrect. Witness testimony established that the land was being cultivated, and the relevant portion of the testimony was not challenged through cross-examination. According to precedent, unrebutted testimony is treated as admitted. The Collector admitted that land in the area was not readily available for sale due to the landowners' strong financial position, indicating that the market value was higher than assessed. The court emphasized the principle that market value must reflect the price at which a willing buyer and seller would transact. The Reference Judge was correct in increasing the compensation to Rs. 8,00,000 per kanal. The landowners presented sale deeds and witness testimony to support their compensation claim, while WAPDA failed to provide any contrary evidence justifying the lower compensation. The respondents cited cases, including Zafar alias Mumtaz v. Sajjad Begum and Raja Abdul Qayyum v. AJK Government, establishing that evidence of agricultural use must be accepted when unchallenged. The court found these precedents applicable in this case. The appeal by WAPDA was dismissed. ------Citations/Precedents: Zafar alias Mumtaz v. Mst. Sajjad Begum (2014 SCR 1549) Raja Abdul Qayyum Khan v. AJK Govt. & others (2016 SCR 623) WAPDA v. Farooq Shahid & others (2016 SCR 1730) – on market value principles Muhammad Mehrban v. WAPDA (2013 SCR 635) – regarding compensation enhancement

Summary: Background:Abdul Malik, the petitioner, was implicated in a case registered under Sections 302, 148, 149, 324, and 337-F PPC at Police Station Jal, District Diamer, through FIR No.24/2019. The incident involved a quarrel between the petitioner's companions and the complainant party, resulting in the death of one individual and injury to another. The petitioner's application for bail was previously denied by the Sessions Judge Diamer, leading to the filing of this petition.---Issues:Whether Abdul Malik qualifies for post-arrest bail despite the serious charges against him, including murder and attempted murder.Whether the absence of a medical report regarding the alleged injury sustained by Nasirullah creates sufficient doubt regarding the petitioner's involvement in the incident.Whether the case, characterized by a cross version and sudden fight, warrants the petitioner's release on bail.Holding/Reasoning/Outcome:The court granted post-arrest bail to Abdul Malik after careful consideration of the circumstances. It noted that the incident arose from a dispute between the petitioner's group and the complainant party, resulting in two FIRs being registered against each other. The absence of a medical report regarding Nasirullah's alleged injury cast doubt on the petitioner's involvement. Furthermore, the nature of the injury sustained by Nasirullah was not disclosed in the injury sheet, further supporting the petitioner's case. Given these factors and the provision under sub-section 2 of Section 497 Cr.P.C. allowing further inquiry into the petitioner's guilt, the court extended the benefit of doubt to the petitioner, granting him post-arrest bail upon furnishing bail bonds.----Citations/Precedents:Section 497 Cr.P.C.Sections 302, 148, 149, 324, and 337-F PPC

Summary: Summary pending