Loading... Account
Dark Mode
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.

Search Results: Categories: Defamation (42 found)

Khalid Siddiqui (Appellant) V/S Muhammad Manzar Ansari (Respondent)

Citation: N/A

Case No: I.A 1/2012

Judgment Date: 04-AUG-14

Jurisdiction: Sindh High Court

Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nazar Akbar

Summary: Defamation Act (Damages and Defamation )---damages awarded---The appellant, a postgraduate officer in the Department of Statistics, Government of Pakistan, accused the respondent of repeatedly publishing defamatory materials about him in an unregistered newspaper called "AKHBAR." The publications had occurred over five years and included false and damaging information. The appellant sent a legal notice to the respondent, demanding compensation for loss of reputation and mental anguish. The appellate court found that the trial court had erred in its assessment. It determined that the appellant had successfully established that the respondent had published defamatory material that harmed his reputation. The court noted that the burden of proof lay on the defendant to establish the truthfulness of the publications, which the defendant failed to do. The court also rejected the defendant's argument that the publications were protected by freedom of speech under Article 19 of the Constitution, emphasizing that such protection was not absolute and must respect decency, morality, and the rights of individuals.The appellate court reversed the trial court's decisions on various issues. It concluded that the plaintiff was entitled to relief and awarded him compensation in the form of general damages, setting the minimum damages at Rs. 300,000 due to the nature of the defamation and the defendant's failure to establish the truthfulness of his publications. The appeal was successful, and the appellate court overturned the trial court's dismissal of the defamation suit, awarding the plaintiff damages and emphasizing the limitations of freedom of speech in cases of defamation.

Sumera Rasheed Vs. The State, etc

Citation: 2023 LHC 6664

Case No: P.S.L.A No.07/2023

Judgment Date: 27.11.2023

Jurisdiction: Lahore High Court

Judge: Justice Muhammad Amjad Rafiq

Summary: Defamation & perjury route differently for trial; concept of judicial proceeding during investigation --- The case involves Sumera Rasheed, the petitioner, seeking special leave to appeal against the acquittal of Abida Shahid and Muhammad Sajjad (respondents No.2 & 3) in a private complaint under sections 500, 193, 195, 196, 211, and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC). The petitioner alleges defamation and malicious prosecution due to false accusations made in an FIR related to a property dispute.Abdul Razaq, Sumera Rasheed's husband, had purchased two plots in Evergreen Housing Colony, Haroon Abad. The dispute arose when suspicions arose that the plot was sold to multiple individuals by Shahid Iqbal, the owner of the colony. Legal actions were taken, including securing status quo through a civil court and a subsequent FIR against the petitioner's family.The petitioner contends that the lower court's order, dated 15.12.2022, under section 265-K of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), which led to the acquittal of the respondents, was not correctly interpreted. The petitioner's counsel argues that the lower court failed to appreciate the law, emphasizing that statements made during investigation also constitute giving or fabricating false evidence.The prosecutor counters, citing section 502-A of the PPC, which grants the Court of Session the authority to entertain complaints directly, and that other offenses can be tried along with the offense under section 500 PPC.The judge, after reviewing the legal arguments, discusses the nature of perjury and the distinctions between lying and perjury. The judge emphasizes that the mode of trial is a crucial aspect, questioning whether offenses under sections 193/195/196/211 PPC can be tried along with section 500 PPC.The judge concludes that the lower court's order was justified, dismissing the special leave to appeal and declining leave to appeal. The decision is based on the understanding that statements made during the investigation, at this premature stage, cannot be the basis for defamation, and the lower court correctly applied the law.The detailed order delves into legal interpretations, emphasizing the importance of eradicating perjury and ensuring justice. The judge expresses concern about the manipulation of cases by powerful elites and the need for a study to understand how cases are structured with the help of police.

Disclaimer: AI/GPT is not a substitute for legal advice. The content on this website is for research only. In case of breach of T.O.S, PLDB reserves the right to revoke or ban membership at any time without notice. Pak Legal Database ® 2023-2026. All Rights Reserved. Version 4.05.2a. Designed & developed by theblinklabs.com

error: Content Protection Enabled
Scroll to Top