“There is not any ocular evidence to show that Muhammad Abbas was murdered by any in the present petitioners. Mere fact that Noor Muhammad and Muhammad Din observed firstly the deceased and after a long way they noticed the petitioners going towards the same direction, didn't necessarily mean that the petitioners were chasing the deceased or were accompanying him. This kind of evidence cannot be treated as evidence of past noticed.
کیا ایف آئی آر درخواست گزار کی رپورٹ پر درج کی گئی تھی اور اگر ہاں تو کیا اسے اس کے خلاف ثبوت کے طور پر استعمال کیا جا سکتا ہے؟
four. It has been noticed by this Court that there is often a delay of one day within the registration of FIR which has not been explained with the complainant. Moreover, there is not any eye-witness of your alleged occurrence and also the prosecution is counting on the witnesses of extra judicial confession. The evidence of extra judicial confession with the petitioners continues to be tendered by Ghulam Dastigir and Mohammad Akram through their statements recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C., on 06.02.2018. Both of them namely Ghulam Dastigir and Mohammad Akram occurred being the real brothers in the deceased but they didn't respond whatsoever on the confessional statements with the petitioners and calmly noticed them leaving, just one after the other, without even moving an inch. They have not mentioned in their statements that the accused held some weapon when they visited them to confess their guilt about the murder of Ghulam Farid which could have precluded these witnesses from apprehending the petitioners. Their conduct does not appear much inspiring or natural. The petitioner, namely, Mst. Mubeena Bibi was arrested on 14.02.2018 and there isn't any explanation concerning why her arrest was not effected after making on the alleged extra judicial confession. It's been held on lots of occasions that extra judicial confession of the accused is usually a weak variety of evidence which may very well be manoeuvred from the prosecution in any case where direct connecting evidence does not come their way. The prosecution is also relying on the evidence of Murid Hussain and Muhammad Afzal which is equally fragile, as both the witnesses Murid Hussain and Muhammad Afzal didn't say a word regarding existence of some light within the place, where they allegedly observed the petitioners alongside one another with a motorcycle at four.
Rulings by courts of “lateral jurisdiction” will not be binding, but may very well be used as persuasive authority, which is to provide substance to your party’s argument, or to guide the present court.
Previous four tax years interpreted. It isn't from the date of finalisation of audit but from the tax year involved. Read get more info more
The ICAP Staff Service Rules, 2011 were framed because of the respondent/Institute, these rules may well not have the operates within a transparent legal and regulatory framework of the respondent/Institute. fourteen. In view of what has long been discussed earlier mentioned, without touching the merits of the case, the preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of your petition is sustained plus the petition is held being not maintainable in terms of Article 199 from the Constitution with the reason that non???statutory rules of service cannot be enforced through writ of mandamus in terms of ratio with the judgment passed through the Supreme Court while in the case of Pakistan Electric Power Company supra. Read more
whether while granting promotion senior employees were considered for promotion or otherwise and submit the compliance report.(Promotion)
Civil Courts keep jurisdiction over title disputes in partition matters. Agreement to sell does not confer title; it calls for legal transfer of title. Agreement to sell must be developed and properly exhibited in evidence. Declining relief based on an unproduced and un-exhibited sale agreement is legally unsustainable. Read more
Justia – an extensive resource for federal and state statutory laws, and case regulation at both the federal and state levels.
In case the employee fails to serve a grievance notice, the NIRC may well dismiss the grievance petition. This is because the employer has not had an opportunity to answer the grievance and attempt to resolve it. In some cases, the NIRC may perhaps allow the employee to amend the grievance petilion to include the grievance notice. However, this is generally only finished Should the employee can show that they'd a good reason for not serving the grievance notice. During the present case, the parties were allowed to guide evidence as well as the petitioner company responded for the allegations therefore they were nicely aware about the allegations and led the evidence as a result this point is ofno use to be appeared into in constitutional jurisdiction at this stage. Read more
, which is Latin for “stand by decided matters.” This means that a court will be bound to rule in accordance with a previously made ruling around the same style of case.
Persuasive Authority – Prior court rulings that may very well be consulted in deciding a current case. It could be used to guide the court, but isn't binding precedent.
To obtain notification from the Supreme Court of Virginia as well as Court of Appeals of Virginia when opinions, orders, rule changes, dockets and other information has become offered, please enter your contact information below.