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)
Numan Quareshi vs State
Summary: S.489-F PPCNo previous history, not fall in prohibitory clause,wants further inquiry(Bail allowed)
Akhtar Munir Vs Secretary Home & T.A etc
Summary: Article 199 of the constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973.Compensation Policy, retrospective effect.
NASEER AHMAD ETC VS STATE ETC
Summary: The nutshell of the discussion is that theprosecution has fully proved its case against the appellant andthere is even no hint of doubt left with regard to his guilt. Weare thus of the considered view that the learned trial court hascommitted no illegality while convicting the appellant by wayof impugned judgment. The appellant has failed to point outany illegality or material irregularity, requiring interference bythis Court in exercise of appellate jurisdiction. Resultantly bymaintaining the judgment dated 19th of August, 2011 of thelearned trial court, we hereby dismiss the instant appeal
SHAHID VS STATE
Summary: Acquittal---The case involved the appellant, who was charged under section 9 (b) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997. The case originated from an FIR (First Information Report) registered at Police Station Zafarwal, District Narowal. The prosecution's case was based on a raid conducted on 19.12.2008, where the appellant was apprehended, and 180 grams of Charas and Rs. 335 were allegedly recovered from his possession. The prosecution presented various witnesses and documents to establish their case. However, the judgment sheet highlights several inconsistencies and contradictions in the prosecution's evidence. These include conflicting testimonies regarding the date and time of the recovery, the handling of seized evidence, and the transmission of evidence to the office of the Chemical Examiner. The judgment concluded that these inconsistencies create doubt about the prosecution's case, and the burden of proof has not been met beyond a reasonable doubt. As a result, the appellant is acquitted of the charges, and the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court are set aside. The appellant had been on bail during the appeal process, and the surety bonds are discharged. In this case, the doubt surrounding the evidence led to the appellant's acquittal.
BASHIR AHMAD VS FDA. ETC.
Summary: The petitioners challenged the legality of these charges, claiming they were not properly informed or heard before the charges were imposed. The respondents argued that Aquifer Charges are legally justified under the Punjab Development of Cities Act, 1976, and have been validated by notifications. They also point out that similar charges are paid by others without objection. Ultimately, the judge dismisses the petitions, stating that FDA-WASA has the legal authority to levy Aquifer Charges as per the relevant legislation. The judge also notes that the petitioners did not provide information about filing declaratory suits or appeals in civil courts, which affects their claim for equitable relief.
KHALID MEHMOOD vs SHABIR AHMED and another
Summary: Summary pending
MUNEER AHMED VS DISTRICT SESSIONS JUDGELASBELLA AT HUB
Summary: Summary pending.
JAMIL AHMAD OTHERSS VS GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA THROUGH COLLECTOR
Summary: Summary pending.
RAFIQ HAJI USMAN VS CHAIRMAN NAB
Summary: Summary pending.
HAROON AHMED S VS SECRETARY COMMUNICATION WORKS DEPARTMENT
Summary: Summary pending.