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)
AZMAT ALI SHEIKH DIRECTORCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER VS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ENFORCEMENT SECURITIES EXCHANGE COMMISSION OF PAKISTAN
Summary: Summary pending.
RAO MUHAMMAD ASHRAF VS GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY ESTABLISHMENT DIVISION ISLAMABAD
Summary: Summary pending.
HASSAN FARID KHAN VS THE STATE
Summary: Summary pending.
MESSRS ACT INTERNATIONAL VS PROVINCIAL EARTHQUAKE REHABILITATION RECONSTRUCTION AUTHORITY THROUGH CHAIRMAN PESHAWAR
Summary: Summary pending.
MUHAMMAD FAREED VS THE STATE
Summary: Summary pending.
MUHAMMAD ARIF VS CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ISLAMABAD THROUGH CHAIRMAN
Summary: Summary pending.
MANZOOR AHMAD VS THE STATE
Summary: Summary pending.
Messrs ACT INTERNATIONAL Vs PERRA through Chairman, Peshawar etc.
Summary: Arts.9 to 29,199 of Constitution of Pakistan, 1973.Right enforceable by High Court in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction.Scope and categories.
Muhammad Alam V. Noor Muhammad and 2 others,
Summary: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------Ss. 22-A(6), 22-B & 561-A---Powers of Justice of Peace to issue directions for registration ofF.I.R.---Scope---Complainant filed application under S.22-A, Cr.P.C. against the accused(petitioner)---Justice of Peace gave directions to the Tehsildar concerned to lodge an F.I.R.against the accused, in spite of the fact that the Tehsildar had already submitted his reportregarding the incident, wherein the allegations levelled against the accused were found to befalse and baseless---Validity---Perusal of Ss.22-A(6) and 22-B, Cr.P.C., clearly demonstratedthat Ex-Officio Justice of Peace could only issue directions, when there was a complaint inrespect of non-registration of a case and if such complaint was brought before him, then he couldsimply direct that the police had to act in accordance with the law and entertain the complaint,and if a cognizable case was made out, then to take further action in accordance with thelaw--- Provisions of S.22-A(6), Cr.P.C. did not make it obligatory for an Ex-Officio Justice ofPeace to necessarily or in a blind fold manner issue directions regarding registration of a criminalcase whenever a complaint was filed before him---Word 'may' used in S.22-A(6), Cr.P.C. clearlyshowed that the jurisdiction of Ex-Officio Justice of Peace in that regard was discretionary innature---Ex-Officio Justice of Peace could simply direct that the police had to act in accordancewith the law and entertain the complaint and if a cognizable offence was made out, then to takefurther action in accordance with the law and it would not be proper for the Justice of Peace toissue directions for registration of case as that would prejudice an accused---Tehsildar hadopined unequivocally that the application under S.22-A, Cr.P.C., filed by the complainant wasabsolutely false and baseless, in view of which there was no justification left for the Justice ofPeace directing registration of case against the accused---Petition for quashing proceedings wasallowed, impugned order of the Justice of Peace was set aside with directions to the Tehsildar toentertain the complaint of the complainant and if a cognizable offence was made out, then toregister a case.Muhammad Bashir v. Station House Officer, Okara Cantt. PLD 2007 SC 539 and Khizar Hayatv. Inspector-General of Police (Punjab) Lahore PLD 2005 Lah. 470 rel.
Murad Vs. Syed Muhammad & others.,
Summary: O.XLI, R. 31 & S. 42 Specific Relief Act. Where a decree was to be reversed, the Appellate Court was bound to reappraise the evidence with reference to the issues by forwarding cogent reasons in support of its findings.