Article 199 of the Constitution allows High Court intervention only when "no other suitable remedy is provided by law." It's nicely-settled that an aggrieved person must exhaust available remedies before invoking High Court jurisdiction, regardless of whether All those remedies suit them. The doctrine of exhaustion of remedies prevents unnecessary High Court litigation. Read more

Delay in recording confessional statement may not be treated fatal on the case of prosecution(Murder Trial)

When the state court hearing the case reviews the regulation, he finds that, when it mentions large multi-tenant properties in some context, it can be actually rather imprecise about whether the ninety-day provision applies to all landlords. The judge, based over the specific circumstances of Stacy’s case, decides that all landlords are held to your 90-working day notice requirement, and rules in Stacy’s favor.

Matter:-SERVICE Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Writer) Const. P. 5066/2024 (D.B.) Ayaz Hussain and 432 Others V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi SHC Citation: SHC-224033 Tag:Presented the legal analysis on the topic issue, we have been from the view that the claim from the petitioners for retroactive regularization from their First contract appointment and seniority and promotion thereon, from that angle is not really legally seem, In addition to promotion and seniority, not absolute rights, they are matter to rules and regulations if the recruitment rules of the topic post allow the case of your petitioners for promotion may be viewed as, however, we have been very clear in our point of view that contractual service cannot be regarded as for seniority and promotion as the seniority is reckoned from the date of normal appointment and promotion depends upon seniority cum Physical fitness, subject matter to availability of vacancy subject into the approval of your competent authority.

criminal revision application is dismissed. reduced to the period of his detention in jail he has already undergone(Criminal Revision )

This Court might interfere where the authority held the proceedings against the delinquent officer in a very fashion inconsistent with the rules of natural justice or in violation of statutory rules prescribing the mode of inquiry or where the conclusion or finding achieved because of the disciplinary authority is based on no evidence. Should the summary or finding is such as no reasonable person would have ever arrived at, the Court may perhaps interfere with the summary or maybe the finding and mildew the relief to make it proper on the facts of every case. In service jurisprudence, the disciplinary authority will be the sole judge of facts. Where the appeal is presented, the appellate authority has coextensive power to re-enjoy the evidence or the nature of punishment. On the aforesaid proposition, we have been fortified because of the decision on the Supreme Court within the case of Ghulam Murtaza Shaikh v. Chief Minister Sindh (2024 SCMR 1757). Read more

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................

Some pluralist systems, including Scots regulation in Scotland and types of civil law jurisdictions in Quebec and Louisiana, tend not to precisely in shape into the dual common-civil law system classifications. These types of systems may possibly have been heavily influenced via the Anglo-American common legislation tradition; however, their substantive regulation is firmly rooted within the civil regulation tradition.

P.C. Liability of petitioners for your stated offences would be determined through the realized trial Court after sifting the evidentiary worthy of with the material manufactured before the same. Till then, case of

This case continues to be cited read more in a lot of subsequent judgments, particularly in cases involving constitutional law, judicial independence, and also the rule of legislation.

 Criminal cases In the common law tradition, courts decide the regulation applicable to the case by interpreting statutes and implementing precedents which record how and why prior cases have been decided. Compared with most civil law systems, common law systems follow the doctrine of stare decisis, by which most courts are bound by their own previous decisions in similar cases. According to stare decisis, all lower courts should make decisions constant with the previous decisions of higher courts.

Regardless of its popularity, not many may perhaps know about its intricacies. This article is really an attempt to highlight the flaws of this section along with the particularly lower threshold that governs it.

A decrease court might not rule against a binding precedent, regardless of whether it feels that it really is unjust; it may only express the hope that a higher court or maybe the legislature will reform the rule in question. When the court believes that developments or trends in legal reasoning render the precedent unhelpful, and desires to evade it and help the law evolve, it may well both hold that the precedent is inconsistent with subsequent authority, or that it should be distinguished by some material difference between the facts of the cases; some jurisdictions allow to get a judge to recommend that an appeal be completed.

P.C. for grant of post arrest bail should even be dismissed. Suffice is to watch that that considerations for pre- arrest and post-arrest bail are thoroughly different. Reliance in this regard is placed on case law titled as “Shah Nawaz v. The State” 2005 SCMR 1899” wherein it has been held via the august Supreme Court of Pakistan as under:--