Summary: Service / Trnasfer: Petitioner are employees of FBR. They impungn their trnasfer order from RTO Faisalabad to other centers.

Summary: Petitioner are BPS -17 demostractor in Federal Medical College, aggrieved of Non decision upon their pending representation for regularization

Summary: Sections of Law; Article 199 of the Constitution and NADRA Ordinance 2000(a) Amenability of NADRA to constitutional jurisdiction of High Court is a different question from maintainability of a writ petition of an employee of NADRA in absence of Statutory rules.(b) A writ petition filed against any irregularities conducted during the process of recruitment, by NADRA authorities would be maintainable before High Court.

Summary: Civil revision decided by this court, non-compliance of the order could be sought through execution before civil court, no proceedings under contempt ordinance, 2003 could be initiated especially when respondent was nor party in early round of litigation.

Summary: Constitutional Petition (Service).Held: (1) Indeed it is true that the employment and retirement benefits are neither a bounty nor largess, but the same have to be earned by performing the assigned job and discharging the prescribed duties, which criteria the petitioner has fully met.(2) The petitioner having been notified as Assistant Taxation officer and having served as such for long span of time, cannot now be denied his perks and privileges, which are protected under the doctrine of legitimate expectancy.(3) Pension is a retirement benefit, paid regularly based generally on the length of service of a pensioner.(4) After retirement of the petitioner, the respondents had no lawful authority or reason to withhold pensionary benefits of the deceased employee.(5) Pension is the right of the civil servant by way of statute, which cannot be taken away arbitrarily.(Writ petition was allowed in the circumstances).

Summary: Contractual Employees have no vested right to be regularized.

Summary: (Lack of evidence---acquittal) The case involved the death of Ziarat Be Jan, a 60-year-old woman, who was found dead in her home. The appellant was seen leaving the room where the deceased was found. The autopsy revealed multiple injuries on the deceased's face, fractures in various bones, and signs of asphyxial death. The appellant was arrested and charged with homicide and carnal assault. However, he was acquitted of the carnal assault charge and convicted under section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, receiving a life sentence. The appellant's counsel argued that since the prosecution failed to prove the charge of rape, their case against the appellant falls apart. They suggested that the appellant was made a scapegoat to cover up the true reasons behind the tragedy. The defense also questioned the absence of the deceased's sons during the incident. The court noted that the absence of the sons raised doubts about the prosecution's case. The allegation of rape was refuted by medical evidence, and the motive for the appellant's involvement was unclear. The court found the prosecution's case full of doubts and inconsistencies, and it set aside the impugned judgment. The appellant was acquitted of the charges.

Summary: Conviction upheld ---- Background:Muhammad Hayat, Wakeel, and Ghous Bakhsh, appellants, were convicted for the murder of Muhammad Siddique, Liaqat Ali, and Abdul Jabbar during a robbery on November 23, 2010. The incident took place in the precincts of Police Station Bhag, District Kachhi, Balochistan. The appellants were tried and convicted by the trial court and their conviction and sentences were upheld by the Federal Shariat Court on November 22, 2014. They were sentenced to death for Qatl-i-Amd (intentional murder) under clause (b) of section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, and to additional terms for robbery.-----Issues:The identification of the assailants by the witnesses given the circumstances of the incident, particularly considering the assailants were strangers to the witnesses and were not named in the crime report.The evidentiary value of the test identification parade and the recovery of weapons based on the appellants' disclosures.------Holding/Reasoning:The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions and sentences of the appellants based on the following reasons:The promptitude with which the FIR was lodged and the lack of named assailants therein were considered to conclusively establish the prosecution's bona fides.The appellants were correctly identified by the witnesses in a test identification parade conducted shortly after their arrest, which ruled out the possibility of manipulation.The identification of the appellants by the witnesses was deemed reliable despite the conditions of darkness, as the light from the motorbikes' headlamps was sufficient for the witnesses to observe the assailants.The recovery of three Kalashnikovs used in the murder, based on the appellants' disclosures, and their forensic linkage to the casings found at the crime scene further corroborated the prosecution's case.The argument that the test identification parade was conducted at a police station, which might not be an appropriate place, was dismissed because the law does not specify a particular location for such exercises.The alternate plea for commutation of the death penalty to life imprisonment on the grounds of ambiguity in determining individual culpability for each fatality was rejected. The collective act of the assailants in cold blood left no room for such a distinction.-----Conclusion:The Supreme Court found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it, affirming the convictions and sentences of the appellants. The judgment highlighted the importance of prompt and bona fide legal recourse, reliable witness identification, and forensic evidence in upholding convictions for heinous crimes.

Summary: Jail appeal, against conviction, involving offense u/s 302/34 PPC

Summary: Criminal appeal, regarding conviction of life imprisonment and having offense u/s 302/34 PPC