Step 1 of 8
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Step 1 of 7
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Latest Judgments (All Jurisdictions within Pakistan)
Liaqat Ali VS The Secretary Ministry of Planning & Development etc
Summary: terminational from contractual service
Muhammad Hanif Qureshi VS Muhammad Ayub, etc.
Summary: Regular first appeal, against judgment and decree dated 02.03.16
Azmat Ullah Vs State
Summary: Brutal Killing of mother by her son.father of the accused as natural witness... place of occurrence admittedly was the house of the complainant and the appellant,, therefore, the complainant was a natural witness.Abnormal delay in sending pistol and empties to the FSL cannot spoil the prosecution case if prosecution has otherwise proved its case against accused.
Imran and another VS The State and another
Summary: 1. The petitioners were charged through statements under Section 164 CrPC after two months of the occurrence without source of satisfaction.2. No test identification parade was held despite the fact that the complainant mentioned in the FIR that he can identify the accused if brought before him.3. although recovery of Rs. 100.000/- each was shown effected form the petitioners yet the fact remains that authenticity of such recovery will be considered by the learned trails Court after recording of evidence.4. Heinousness of an offence is no ground to refuse bail to an accused who otherwise becomes entitled for the concession of bail.
Shabir-ur-Rehman Vs The State
Summary: Interested witness... registration of FIR after preliminary investigation...purpose of presence of complainant at place of occurrence not proved....conflict between ocular and medical evidence...motive not proved...absconcion not conclusive proof of guilt.
Adnan Khan Vs The State
Summary: The stipulation of the cancellation of bail in the compromise deed, produced as Ex.PA at BBA stage, and the consent of parties cannot override the law. Provisions of Section 497(5) Cr.P.C. cannot be made subservient to the consent of complainant. Prerogative of the Court to cancel the bail cannot be shifted to complainant on the basis of mutual agreement between parties. Grant of bail on the basis of condition cannot be sustained as principles for the grant of bail and cancellation thereof are altogether different.
Arbab Muhammad Kabir Khan Vs Arbab Abdul Rahman
Summary: It also appeared from the record that petitioners and their forefather were aware of the distribution of the estate and extra share of Muhammad Azeem Khan. However, they remained silent and never agitated their purported rights. The attorney for petitioners/plaintiffs while appearing as PW-3, made several admissions in his cross examination which not only constitute estoppel on their part but also establish a waiver of their alleged rights.15.As all the mutations relating to the inheritance of Muhammad Ameer Khan etc have been sanctioned prior to 1890 and the same have been given effect in the record of rights which effect was repeated in the Jamabandi of the year 1929-30 besides, said entries were not challenged by the father and grandfather of petitioners during their lifetime, therefore, petitioners have no locus standi to challenge the same and there is nothing on the record to indicate as to why they had not challenged the said entries or inheritance mutations.e.The suit is badly and hopelessly time-barred as the plaintiffs despite having knowledge did not file the suit after 40 years of the death of their father. Law of limitation is a harsh law and the court cannot award any relaxation in this regard unless provided by the statute itself. The passage of time sets the law of limitation in operation.
Zafar Hajizai etc Vs Ayaz Mashwani
Summary: General damaged claimed for mental torture, agony , defamation and financial loss are to be assessed following the Rule of Thumband said exercise fell in the discreationary jurisdiction of the Court, which must be decided in accordance with the facts & circumstances of each case.
Iftikhar Khan Vs Sikandar etc
Summary: Article 199 of Constitution of Pakistan, 1973.When original tenancy was admitted by the tenant, then landlord or his successor was not required to prove the factum of existence of relationship of land lord and tenant. In such circumstances land lord could not be burdened to produce the marginal witness of rent deed.When the tenant seeks declaration that he is the owner through sale deed or an agreement to sell, than burden would lie on him to prove the payment of sale consideration and the correction of the deed/ agreement by producing marginal witness in accordance with Article 79 of Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984.
Muhammad Naseer Vs The State
Summary: 1. The complainant stated that he was also fired at but escaped unhurt, had he been present being empty handed he too was at the mercy of the assaillants and they would have easily done away with him.2. The complainant could not show the purpose of his presence and coming to the fields. Even the accused had got nothing on the spot, neither the complainant was ploughing or sowing the field or were in possession of the same which annoyed the accused to a degree to kill the deceased.3. The non production of best avvailable evidence leads to a negative inference against the prosecution.4. the dead body was identified by the relative and co-villagers, i.e. before the police and before the doctor at the time of post mortem examination, had the complainant been present at the spot he would have least identified the deceased before the police as the inquest was already prepared on the spot.