لاہور ہائیکورٹ نے قرار دیا ہے کہ پاکستان میں لوگوں کو جھوٹے مقدمات میں ملوث کر دینے کی شکایت عام ہے عدالت نے حکم جاری کیا ہے................
Delay in recording confessional statement will not be treated fatal for the case of prosecution(Murder Trial)
Therefore, this petition is found to generally be not maintainable and it is dismissed along with the pending application(s), plus the petitioners may find remedies through the civil court process as discussed supra. Read more
competent authority and if any appeal or representation is filed the same shall be decided(Promotion)
record with the department there is not any record available whatsoever regarding promotion on the petitioner(Promotion)
This is because transfer orders are typically thought of within the administrative discretion of the employer. However, there may be exceptions in cases where the transfer is motivated by malice, personal vendetta, or discrimination against the employee, They could have grounds to challenge before the suitable forum. Read more
be recognized without an iota of doubt in all other jurisdictions) will be inferred. This is a horrifying reality, a particularly reduced threshold for an offence that carries capital punishment.
In fact, this provision nullifies the difference between manslaughter and murder. Section 318 with the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 defines Qatl-i-khata (manslaughter) as “Whoever, without intention to cause the death of or cause harm into a person causes death of this kind of person, possibly by mistake of act or by mistake of fact is claimed to commit qatl-i-khata.”
This ruling has conditions, and For case law on caveat emptor the reason that petitioners unsuccessful a qualifying exam, they cannot claim equity or this Court's jurisdiction based to the Niazi case analogy. 9. In view of the above mentioned facts and circumstances with the case, petitioners have not demonstrated a case for this court's intervention under Article 199 of the Constitution. Read more
Knowledge on the accused is actually a matter being inferred from the circumstances, for it being a state of mind, is very hard being proved otherwise.”
Consequently, it had been held that the right to some healthy environment was part of your fundamental right to life and right to dignity, under Article 9 and fourteen in the Pakistan Constitution, respectively. The Court ruled that the word “life” covers all facets of human existence, all such amenities and amenities that a person is entitled to love with dignity, legally and constitutionally.
Regardless of its popularity, not many may perhaps know about its intricacies. This article is undoubtedly an attempt to highlight the flaws of this section along with the exceptionally very low threshold that governs it.
This landmark case expanded the fundamental rights to life and dignity by interpreting these rights to encompass the right to some healthy environment. This decision is particularly significant as there are not any specific provisions inside the Pakistani Constitution regarding environmental protection. In relation to environmental law in Pakistan, it truly is important that the case established the application on the precautionary principle where there is often a menace to environmental rights, and emphasised the positive obligations in the State in protecting the right to some clean and healthy environment.
Pakistan’s legal system is not really without flaws: overhauling is overdue as well as legislation regarding murder involves significant reconsideration and clarification. To the time being, the minimum that can be done is to make sure that the First Investigation Report (FIR) is registered with honesty and after properly ascertaining the facts.