Summary: Bail Allowed---The case revolved around a double murder that occurred at a private residence. Two unknown individuals attacked the victims, leading to the deaths. The incident was reported by a relative of one of the victims.Later, one of the victims' daughters provided a supplementary statement, identifying two suspects and suggesting a potential motive involving a third individual. This supplementary statement differed from the initial report and implicated the suspects in collaborating with the third individual. The police arrested one of the suspects based on this statement and recovered items associated with the crime. The investigation connected the suspects to the third individual through recovered uniforms.Upon examination, the Supreme Court noted the discrepancies between the initial report and the supplementary statement. It recognized the need to address these discrepancies and the evidentiary value of the supplementary statement during the ongoing trial. Considering the stage of the trial and the lack of substantial reasons for keeping the suspect in custody, the court decided to grant bail. The suspect was ordered to be released on bail after fulfilling specific requirements set by the trial court.This legal analysis emphasizes the importance of resolving inconsistencies in the witnesses' accounts and acknowledges the necessity for additional evidence to be presented during the ongoing trial. The decision to grant bail is based on the current status of the trial proceedings.

Summary: Bail Denied--The petitioner requested post-arrest bail while claiming that his wife's death was a result of suicide. The deceased had complained of maltreatment and shared her suffering with her parents prior to her demise.After reviewing the case, the Supreme Court found it unlikely that a feeding mother of a 9-month-old infant would commit suicide. The autopsy report indicated a ligature mark around the deceased's neck, consistent with manual compression rather than a fall caused by gravitational pull. The petitioner had initially obtained ad interim pre-arrest bail, which was later recalled. He then shifted his stance to assert that his wife's death was a suicide.The court considered the joint residence of the spouses and the petitioner's failure to provide a satisfactory explanation for what happened to his wife while they shared the same roof. The court noted ongoing acrimony between the couple, which provided "reasonable grounds" for denying bail. Given these factors and the legal framework, the court concluded that the petitioner's plea for post-arrest bail was not justified. The petition was dismissed, and leave to appeal was declined.

Summary: Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act (XXXV of 1973)- - -Ss. 5 & 10-Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199-Constitutional petition-Provincial Bar Council, actions of-Petitioner was aggrieved of subscription of General Fund and Benevolent Fund on the plea of exorbitant-Validity-Other than Advocate General of the Province who was ex-officio member and chairman of Punjab Bar Council, nothing in Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973 suggested that any administrative or financial control was exercised by Federal or Provincial Government over the affairs of Punjab Bar Council-Punjab Bar Council was not performing any function in connection with affairs of Federation or Province or a local authority-For the purpose of maintainability of Constitutional petition, status of Punjab Bar Council was to be that of a status of Pakistan Bar Council-Punjab Bar Council was an autonomous private body without any government control, though constituted under Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973-High Court declined to interfere in the matter as Constitutional petition against Punjab Bar Council was not maintainable-Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Syed Iqbal Hussain Shah Gillani v. Pakistan Bar Council through Secretary, Supreme Court Bar Building, Islamabad and others 2021 SCMR 425; Mirza Muhammad Nazakat Baig v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice, Islamabad and another 2020 SCMR 631 and Sardar Qurban Ali Dogar v. Pakistan Bar Council and others (Writ Petition No.228 of 2022) rel. Petitioner in person.

Summary: (a) Sindh Minimum Wages Act, 2015 (VIII of 2016)- -Ss. 4, 5 & 6-Minimum rate of wages, revision of-Provincial Government cannot itself revise the minimum rates of wages; it can only be done on the recommendation of the Minimum Wages Board (釘oard)-Sindh Minimum Wages Act, 2015 has made it obligatory for the Government to act on the recommendation of the Board on all occasions of fixation as well as revision of minimum wages. The (Provincial) Government could only declare the minimum rates of wages on the recommendation of the Minimum Wages Board (釘oard). The power of the Government to declare the minimum rates of wages has been qualified to be exercised on the recommendation of the Board. The words 都ubject to such exceptions as may be specified in the notification used in section 6(1)(a) of the Sindh Minimum Wages Act, 2015 (奏he Act) and 都ubject to such modifications and exceptions as may be specified in the notification used in section 6(3) of the Act may refer to exceptions, or modifications in the exceptions, that could be created in view of 砺arious classes of workers or industry and should not be understood to mean that the Government could itself alter the minimum rates of wages recommended by the Board in view of a detailed and exhaustive mechanism for fixation of the minimum rates of wages spelled out in sections 4, 5 and 6 the Act. The Act has made it obligatory for the Government to act on the recommendation of the Board on all occasions of fixation as well as revision of minimum wages. The revision of minimum wage is to be done according to the policy and mechanism laid down in the Act. The Government cannot go against the provisions of the Act and arrogate to itself the function entrusted to the Board. (b) Sindh Minimum Wages Act, 2015 (VIII of 2016)- -Ss. 4, 5 & 6 & Preamble-Constitution of Pakistan, Arts. 3, 9, 14, 37(a) & 38(a)-Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Art. 23-Minimum wage-Importance of minimum wage stated. Minimum wage laws help ensure justice at work. The minimum wage has remained a core element of public policy and the International Labour Organization (ILO) designated the minimum wage as an international labour standard. [p. 304] E Brishen Rogers, 'Justice at Work: Minimum Wage Laws and Social Equality' (2014) 92 Tex. L. Rev. 1543, 1548 and David Neumark and William L. Wascher, Minimum Wages (MIT Press 2008) 1 ref. Minimum wage is a primary measure of the social value of work; they bring a change in workplace power balance by giving workers rights vis-vis employers; and they require employers and consumers to internalize costs of increased wages The requirement of establishing equitable and egalitarian work based social structures is a Constitutional command. The Constitution emphasizes on distributive justice with constitutional values of social, economic and political justice. It calls for 兎limination of exploitation and enjoins to protect the 兎conomic interests of the workers and ensure 兎quitable adjustment of rights between employers and employees. Right to life including right to livelihood under Article 9 ensures just and favourable remuneration for workers. Right to dignity under Article 14 ensures decent work for workers i.e., working conditions and wages that enhance rather than undermine workers self-respect and social standing. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights also provides that remuneration must be paid to each worker to ensure 殿n existence worthy of human dignity. Wage fixation is an important social welfare measure to be determined in the light of the economic reality of the situation and the minimum needs of the worker with an eye to the preservation of his efficiency as a worker. It is a delicate task, a fine balance is to be achieved. The demands of social justice, necessitating that the workers receive their proper share in the national income they help to produce, need to be balanced against the depletion, every increase in wages brings in the profits of the industry. The central character in this process remains the worker who deserves to get a fair share in the deal, as far as that can be, without at the same time impinging on the vital interests of the industry whose continuity and success are also the mainstay of labour. Minimum wage may preferably be fixed at a level that is 田apable of meeting a worker痴 basic living needs and those of his family, for housing, nourishment, education, health, leisure, clothing, hygiene, transportation and social security, with periodic adjustments to maintain its purchasing power. With the growth and development of national economy, living standards improve and therefore notions about minimum wage need to be more progressive. Hindustan Hosiery Industries v. F. H. Lala AIR 1974 SC 526 and The Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil 1988, Art. 7 (IV). ref. Jan Muhammad Khashkheli (In person) (in C.M.A. No. 173 of 2022). Hasan Riaz, Research Officer, SCRC for Research Assistance.

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Intra Court Appeal in WP 208 -22 (Petitioner seeks to setaside impugned orders on dispensation of Service / Employment)

Summary: (a) After PMDC refused to recognize academic qualification like M Phil in Oral Pathology its recognition by HEC was sufficient considering its holder for appointment on the post of Assistant Professor Oral Pathology, notwithstanding requirement of such recognition by PMDC in the existing rules.(b) Requirement of recognition of degree of M Phil in Oral Pathology by PMDC after its dissolution was found to be unreasonable & illogical

Summary: Pending

Summary: Acquittal granted--- In the matter of sentences affecting deprivation of life or liberty of a person and unless some aggravating circumstances do not permit, so, liberally exercise enabling power under section 35 and section 397, Cr.P.C. respectively to order concurrent running of sentence in one trial and so also consolidation of earlier sentence while handing down sentence of imprisonment in a subsequent trial----The petitioner, a convicted prisoner, seeks a declaration that the sentences awarded in two separate cases should run concurrently rather than consecutively. The petitioner argued that the lower courts did not specify the concurrent nature of the sentences, leading to his dual life imprisonment. The petitioner asserted that the court has jurisdiction to order concurrent sentences under Section 35 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) and Section 397 Cr.P.C. The court, citing established legal principles, acknowledged the authority of the trial and appellate courts to order concurrent sentences in the same trial or subsequent trials involving multiple offenses. The court emphasized the need for a liberal interpretation of punitive laws favoring individual liberty, unless statutory law explicitly directs otherwise. It highlights that Section 35, Cr.P.C., empowered the court to order concurrent sentences during the same trial, while Section 397, Cr.P.C., provided for concurrent sentences when a person is already undergoing imprisonment. The court allowed the writ petition, directing that the sentences in the two FIRs run concurrently.

Summary: (a) Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance (XLVI of 2001)---S. 22---Execution First Appeal---Auction sale in execution of banking decree---Objection petition---Property measuring 14 kanals 10 marlas was auctioned in execution of judgment and decree passed against judgment-debtors---Auction/sale had earlier been set aside, matter was remanded by High Court, and upon remand Banking Court dismissed objection petition---Appellant challenged the dismissal, alleging fraud, gross irregularities, defective proclamation, non-service, absence of reserve price, change of auction venue, and sale of valuable property at grossly inadequate price---High Court examined the auction proceedings and found material illegalities at every stage---Auction proceedings were held to be legally unsustainable. (b) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---O. XXI, Rr. 66, 67 & 54(2)---Auction sale---Settlement of terms and conditions of sale---Mandatory duty of Court---Banking Court failed to settle terms and conditions of auction in the language of the Court or grant specific approval as required under O. XXI, R. 66(1), C.P.C.---Matter was left to complete discretion of the court-auctioneer, resulting in manifold and major mistakes---Proclamation of sale, where property is to be sold through public auction, must be drawn after notice to the concerned judgment-debtor and in accordance with mandatory requirements of law---Unbridled delegation of such powers to the court-auctioneer was not permissible---Violation of O. XXI, R. 66, C.P.C. vitiated the auction proceedings. Cited Cases: Brig. (Retd.) Mazhar-ul-Haq and another v. M/s Muslim Commercial Bank Limited, Islamabad and another PLD 1993 Lahore 706. Muhammad Hassan v. Messrs Muslim Commercial Bank Ltd. through Branch Manager and 3 others 2003 CLD 1693 Lahore. (c) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---O. XXI, R. 69(2)---Auction sale---Change of date and venue---No fresh publication or adequate circulation---Proclamation fixed auction at the site on 19.06.1999, but auction was adjourned to 26.06.1999 and venue was abruptly changed to the office of the decree-holder without fresh publication, proper circulation, permission of the Banking Court, or taking the judgment-debtor/owner into confidence---Case was not one of mere adjournment for less than seven days under O. XXI, R. 69(2), C.P.C.; rather the entire venue of auction was changed without due intimation---Such change made the proceedings highly suspicious and contrary to the requirements of transparency in judicial sales. Cited Cases: Mst. Nadia Malik v. Messrs Makki Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd. through Chief Executive and others 2011 CLD 1517. Siraj Ahmad through L.Rs v. Faysal Bank Limited and others 2018 CLD 233. (d) Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)---O. XXI---Auction sale---Reserved price---Failure to fix reserved price---Effect---Proclamation was published without fixing any reserved price of the property---Property comprising a bungalow on more than 14 kanals was sold for Rs.850,000 although appellant alleged its worth was more than Rs.15 million in 1999---Absence of reserve price was significant and fatal in the circumstances, particularly where other auction proceedings were also not conducted in a regular, normal and transparent manner---Reserve price is necessary to prevent manipulation and sale at an arbitrary or grossly inadequate amount---Failure to mention reserve price in proclamation materially affected legality of the auction. Cited Cases: National Bank of Pakistan and 117 others v. SAF Textile Mills Ltd. and another PLD 2014 SC 283. Zakaria Ghani and 4 others v. Muhammad Ikhlaq Memon and 8 others PLD 2016 SC 229. Messrs Lanvin Traders, Karachi v. Presiding Officer, Banking Court No. 2, Karachi and others 2013 SCMR 1419. (e) Judicial sale---Sanctity of judicial sales---Fraud distinguished from mere irregularity---Judicial sales should not ordinarily be set aside merely on technicalities or simple irregularities unless material loss is shown---However, where fraud is clearly established, judicial sale may be set aside to preserve the sanctity of Court-supervised sale proceedings---In the present case, material irregularities were committed at every stage and fraud in publication and conduct of auction was apparent from the record---No satisfactory proof existed that one-fourth of auction price was deposited on the date of sale; rather draft appeared to have been prepared on subsequent dates---Gross illegalities and infirmities rendered the entire auction a nullity. Cited Case: Zakaria Ghani and 4 others v. Muhammad Ikhlaq Memon and 8 others PLD 2016 SC 229. (f) Limitation---Objection to auction sale on ground of fraud---Starting point of limitation---Clear and definite knowledge of fraud---Banking Court’s finding regarding delay in filing objection petition was contrary to law and unsupported by cogent reasons---Where auction is challenged on ground of fraud in publication and conduct of sale, time starts running only when the victim gains clear and definite knowledge of the facts constituting fraud, not merely from vague hints or clues---Appellant-lady had separated from her husband much prior to the auction and knowledge could not be presumed merely because her husband had earlier remained involved in litigation---No material showed that appellant delayed approaching the Court after gaining specific knowledge of the fraud. Cited Cases: Mst. Manzoor Jahan Begum and others v. Haji Hussain Bakhsh PLD 1966 SC 375. Nur Ahmed Chowdhury v. Ruhul Amin Chowdhury PLD 1961 Dacca 589. Brig. (Retd.) Mazhar-ul-Haq and another v. M/s Muslim Commercial Bank Limited, Islamabad and another PLD 1993 Lahore 706. (g) Auction-purchaser and subsequent purchasers---Plea of bona fide purchase---Purchase during pendency of objections and dispute---Subsequent purchasers claimed protection as bona fide purchasers for value---Record showed that they purchased the property during pendency of objections and disputes relating to auction---Such purchasers could not claim an independent superior equity and were to sink or swim with the auction-purchaser---Once auction itself was declared illegal, the plea of bona fide subsequent purchase was of no assistance. (h) Banking Court---Execution proceedings---Fraud, defective proclamation and illegal auction---High Court’s interference---Banking Court dismissed objection petition despite serious defects in auction proceedings, absence of reserve price, unauthorized change of venue, lack of adequate publication, and questionable deposit of auction money---High Court held that impugned auction and sale certificate could not be sustained in law---Objection petition was accepted. Disposition: Execution First Appeal was allowed; objection petition of the appellant was accepted; impugned auction and sale certificate were declared illegal; judgment dated 05.04.2016 passed by the Banking Court, Bahawalpur was set aside; no order as to costs.