Summary: S.302,324,34 PPCImprovement in testimony of interested witness,contradictory statements, benefit of doubt(Acquitted)

Summary: Concept of license under Easement Act, 1882 is discussed. Writ not maintainable against revocation of license---The Standing Counsel argued that the license was a privilege, not a right, and could be revoked without reason, referencing legal precedents. Both parties leveled allegations against each other, with the respondents claiming that the petitioner created embarrassment for the Postmaster General's office and accused him of blackmail, while the petitioner claimed that the respondents were demanding illegal gratification for the license's continuation. The order discussed the nature of the license, which was initially meant to facilitate illiterate individuals in conveying messages through post, and noted that it had lost its effectiveness over time. The legal provisions related to licenses were cited, including the revocability of licenses unless coupled with a transfer of property or the licensee had executed a work of permanent character incurring expenses. The order sheet concluded that since the license was revocable under Section 60 of the Easements Act, the petitioner's request for an opportunity to be heard had no merit. The petitioner was advised to seek compensation through a court of competent jurisdiction if he believed he was evicted for no fault. The order also directed the Postmaster General to review the rules and policy of issuing such licenses that were being misused and to inform the court of the steps taken. Ultimately, the petition was dismissed.

Summary: Facts: The suo moto proceedings were initiated based on a letter from Justice Helpline, an NGO, concerning the suicide bomb attack on a church in Peshawar and threats to the Kalash tribe and Ismailies in Chitral. The attack resulted in 81 deaths, with various other complaints from minority communities, including forced conversions, threats, and desecration of places of worship.Issues: The primary issue was whether the fundamental rights of religious minorities, as guaranteed by the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, were being adequately protected and enforced.Ruling: The Court acknowledged the inadequate protection and enforcement of minority rights. It directed several actions:Establishment of a taskforce for developing a strategy of religious tolerance.Development of appropriate curricula at schools and colleges to promote a culture of religious and social tolerance.Federal Government to take steps against hate speech in social media.Constitution of a National Council for minorities' rights.Establishment of a Special Police Force to protect places of worship of minorities.Enforcement of policy directives regarding reservation of quota for minorities in all services.Prompt law enforcement action in cases of rights violations or desecration of minority worship places.A separate file to be maintained by the Court's office for monitoring the implementation of this judgment.Key Citations:Article 184(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.The Last Sermon (Khutbah) of the Holy Prophet Muhammad ﷺ (Farewell Sermon).UN Declaration on the Elimination on All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief.Precedents:Brown Vs. Board of Education of Topeka (347 US 483 (1954)).Dred Scott Vs. Sandford (60 U.S. 393 (1857)).Al-Jehad Trust Vs. Federation of Pakistan [PLD 1997 SC 84].Various provisions of the Holy Quran and sayings of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) regarding religious tolerance and protection of minorities.Significance: This judgment represents a significant step by the Supreme Court of Pakistan in reinforcing the constitutional mandate for the protection of minority rights. It underscores the need for proactive measures by the government and law enforcement agencies to ensure religious tolerance and safeguard the rights and places of worship of minorities.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.

Summary: Summary pending.