Summary: (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)- -S. 497(1), third proviso-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324, 429, 148, 149, 337-D & 337-F(v)-Murderous assault-Bail, refusal of-Delay in conclusion of the trial attributable to the accused-Report of the Trial Court about the day to day proceedings of the trial showed that the delay in conclusion of the trial was mostly attributable to the accused as he kept on moving numerous applications i.e. for acquittal under section 249-A, Cr.P.C, discharge, medical examination of injured, constitution of medical board for re-examination of the injured, stay of proceedings, summoning of roznamcha and original record of re-examination of injured etc-Report of the Trial Court clearly showed that the trial was being concluded by not only taking the matter almost on day to day basis but deciding the applications filed by the parties on almost daily basis-Prosecution evidence was almost complete barring two Investigating Officers and the Doctor, who were yet to be examined-Moreover the accused was specifically nominated in the crime report with a specific allegation of causing fire arm injury on the shoulder of the injured and he was arrested from the spot with the weapon of offence-Application was dismissed and accused was refused bail. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)- -S. 497(1), third proviso-Bail-Scope-Delay in conclusion of trial-Bail cannot be claimed as a matter of right even if delay is not attributable to the accused. Mirza Abid Majeed, D.P.G., Naveed, ASI and Ahsan., DSP, Circle City Kasur for the State.

Summary: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)- Petitioner in person.

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: (a) Constitution of Pakistan:----Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Seizure of vehicle for alleged advertisement tax evasion---Absence of statutory procedure---Violation of fundamental rights---Petitioners' delivery vehicle carrying perishable goods was seized by agents of local councils for non-payment of advertisement tax---Held, no subordinate legislation or bye-laws had been framed under Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Local Government Act, 2013 for regulating collection or enforcement mechanism of advertisement fee---No authorization was placed on record empowering officials or contractors to seize moveable property---Impugned actions were without lawful authority and amounted to abuse of statutory powers---Seizure of vehicle declared illegal; vehicle ordered to be released---Petition partially allowed.(b) Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Local Government Act (XXVIII of 2013):----S. 45(3) & (4)---Seizure of movable property---Requirement of statutory authorization---Scope---Seizure of vehicle by local authorities/agents for non-payment of advertisement fee---Held, powers under S.45(3) of the Act to recover dues by distress and sale of moveable property must be exercised strictly in accordance with law---Department must issue specific notification authorizing designated officials to exercise such power against identified individuals and property---No such authorization was available on record---Action taken by unauthorized persons is ultra vires, illegal and not protected under law.(c) Administrative Law:----Exercise of discretion---Abuse of power---Due process---Scope---Public authorities vested with discretionary powers must act within legal bounds, with bona fides, and in accordance with due process---Where law prescribes specific procedure for enforcement (such as recovery through arrears of land revenue), authorities cannot bypass it and exercise coercive measures without procedural safeguards---Seizure of vehicle containing food items without due process was unreasonable and contrary to constitutional protections.**(d) Local Government---Advertisement fee---Framing of bye-laws---Held, non-framing of bye-laws does not bar the levy of advertisement fee under enabling statute---However, collection and enforcement mechanisms must be exercised lawfully---Petitioners directed to respond to impugned notices, after which appropriate authority shall decide matter after affording hearing---Petitioners given liberty to challenge final decision through appropriate legal remedy.(e) Contempt of Court:----Non-compliance of interim order---Petitioners' failure to furnish bond---Effect---Petitioners sought contempt action against respondents for alleged violation of interim order barring recovery subject to filing of personal bond---Held, since petitioners themselves failed to comply with condition (i.e., execution of bond), no contempt was made out against respondents---Contempt petition dismissed.----Disposition:Writ Petition partially allowed---Seizure of vehicle declared illegal and vehicle ordered to be released---Petitioners directed to respond to notices; matter to be adjudicated by competent officer after hearing---Contempt petition dismissed for lack of compliance.

Summary: Police Matter, Against dismissal of petition U/o 22A Crpc for registration of Criminal Case.

Summary: Police Matter: Petition against refusal by Justice of Peace to allow 22 -A.