Taking anyone’s life is usually a heinous crime that devastates people, communities, and society in general. The harsh punishment serves for a deterrent to potential offenders and seeks to copyright the sanctity of human life.
The court emphasized that in cases of intentional murder, the gravity on the offense demands the most stringent punishment, thinking of the sanctity of human life and deterrence for potential offenders.
This Court may well 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 arrived at because of the disciplinary authority is based on no evidence. If your conclusion or finding is like no reasonable person would have ever arrived at, the Court could interfere with the summary or perhaps the finding and mold the relief to make it ideal into the facts of each case. In service jurisprudence, the disciplinary authority would be the sole judge of facts. Where the appeal is presented, the appellate authority has coextensive power to re-respect the evidence or the nature of punishment. Over the aforesaid proposition, we have been fortified via the decision in the Supreme Court within the case of Ghulam Murtaza Shaikh v. Chief Minister Sindh (2024 SCMR 1757). Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Creator) Source: Order: Downloads 252 Order Date: 24-JAN-25 Approved for Reporting WhatsApp
Subscription access exclusively for organizations/businesses (SCC ID needed) to criminal and traffic case information in the general district courts to the purpose of confirming an individual’s date of birth.
Previous four tax years interpreted. It isn't from the date of finalisation of audit but from the tax year involved. Read more
Matter:-SERVICE Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Writer) Const. P. 642/2023 (D.B.) Fatima Noor V/S Dow University of Health Science and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi SHC Citation: SHC-225471 Tag:Coming to your main case, It's also a well-recognized proposition of regulation that when an inquiry is conducted on charges of misconduct by a public servant, the Court is concerned with determining whether the inquiry was held by a competent officer or whether rules of natural justice are complied with. Whether the findings or conclusions are based on some evidence, the authority entrusted with the power to hold inquiry has jurisdiction, power, and authority to achieve a finding of fact or summary. But that finding must be based on some evidence. Neither the technical rules nor proof of the fact or evidence during the Stricto-Sensu, implement to disciplinary proceedings. When the authority accepts that evidence and summary obtain support therefrom, the disciplinary authority is entitled to hold that the delinquent officer is guilty of your charge, however, that is topic to your procedure provided under the relevant rules rather than otherwise, with the reason that the Court in its power of judicial review does not act as appellate authority to re-recognize the evidence and to arrive at its independent findings about the evidence.
148 . Const. P. 8180/2019 (D.B.) Saif Shujaat and Ors V/S Govt. of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi Offered the legal analysis on the topic issue, we are with the view that the claim of your petitioners for retroactive regularization from their Original contract appointment and promotion thereon, from that angle isn't legally seem, Apart from promotion and seniority, not absolute rights, They are really subject matter to rules and regulations Should the recruitment rules of the topic post allow the case of the petitioners for promotion can be viewed as, however, we're crystal clear in our point of view that contractual service cannot be viewed as for seniority and promotion because the seniority is reckoned from the date of regular appointment and promotion depends upon seniority cum Conditioning, matter to availability of vacancy issue for the approval in the competent authority. Read more
Binding Precedent – A rule or principle recognized by a court, which other courts are obligated to follow.
Accessing free case law sites in Pakistan is essential for legal professionals, students, and anyone seeking to understand Pakistani legal precedents.
This public interest litigation came before the Supreme Court of Pakistan when petitioners challenged the construction of a nearby electricity grid station resulting from opportunity health risks and dangers.
The appellate court determined that click here the trial court experienced not erred in its decision to allow more time for information to be gathered with the parties – specifically regarding the issue of absolute immunity.
three. Rule of Legislation: The court reiterated the importance of upholding the rule of law and making certain that all institutions function within their constitutional mandates.
ninety . Const. P. 1015/2021 (D.B.) Muhammad Saleem Jehangir V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi It's also important to note that neither seniority nor promotion is the vested right of the civil servant, therefore, neither any seniority nor any promotion may be claimed or granted without the actual length of service on account of vested rights. The purpose of prescribing a particular duration of service for getting entitled to get considered for promotion to your higher quality, of course, just isn't without logic given that the officer who's in the beginning inducted to a particular post needs to provide around the mentioned post to gain experience to hold the next higher post also to serve the public inside of a befitting method.
The residents argued that the high-voltage grid station would pose a health risk and prospective hazard to local residents. In the end, the court determined the scientific evidence inconclusive, while observing the general development supports that electromagnetic fields have adverse effects on human health. The Court accepted the petitioner’s argument that it should adopt the precautionary principle established out inside the 1992 Rio Declaration within the Environment and Enhancement, the first international instrument that linked environment protection with human rights, whereby The shortage of full scientific certainty should not be used as being a reason to prevent environmental degradation.