The smart Trick of audit 177 4 case laws That Nobody is Discussing

The smart Trick of audit 177 4 case laws That Nobody is Discussing

Blog Article

Taking anyone’s life is usually a heinous crime that devastates households, communities, and society in general. The severe punishment serves like a deterrent to prospective offenders and seeks to copyright the sanctity of human life.

The court emphasised that in cases of intentional murder, the gravity in the offense demands the most stringent punishment, looking at the sanctity of human life and deterrence for probable offenders.

four.  It's been noticed by this Court that there is often a delay of one day during the registration of FIR which has not been explained with the complainant. Moreover, there is not any eye-witness of your alleged occurrence along with the prosecution is depending on the witnesses of extra judicial confession. The evidence of extra judicial confession of the petitioners has become tendered by Ghulam Dastigir and Mohammad Akram through their statements recorded under Section 161, Cr.P.C., on 06.02.2018. Both of these namely Ghulam Dastigir and Mohammad Akram happened to generally be the real brothers of the deceased but they did not respond at all to your confessional statements of the petitioners and calmly saw 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 glance much inspiring or natural. The petitioner, namely, Mst. Mubeena Bibi was arrested on 14.02.2018 and there is no explanation as to why her arrest was not effected after making of the alleged extra judicial confession. It's been held on a great number of situations that extra judicial confession of an accused can be a weak type of evidence which may be manoeuvred via the prosecution in almost any case where direct connecting evidence does not come their way. The prosecution is usually counting on the evidence of Murid Hussain and Muhammad Afzal which is equally fragile, as both the witnesses Murid Hussain and Muhammad Afzal did not say a word as to existence of some light with the place, where they allegedly observed the petitioners jointly on a motorcycle at four.

Rulings by courts of “lateral jurisdiction” are not binding, but could be used as persuasive authority, which is to offer substance on the party’s argument, or to guide the present court.

The claimed recovery might be used, in the most, for corroboration with the main evidence, but by itself it cannot be described as a basis for conviction. They further submitted that the petitioners Bhoora and Mst. Mubeena Bibi also pointed out the place of event. The explained memo of pointation is irrelevant and inadmissible as almost nothing was latest case laws discovered as a result of these kinds of pointation. The place of event and also the place of throwing the dead body were already within the knowledge of witnesses prior to their pointation by the petitioners. Reliance is additionally placed on case regulation titled as “Ijaz Ahmad and Another v. The State” (1997 SCMR 1279) wherein it's been held by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan as under:

This Court may possibly interfere where the authority held the proceedings against the delinquent officer inside a 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 attained through the disciplinary authority is based on no evidence. When the summary or finding is including no reasonable person would have ever achieved, the Court might interfere with the conclusion or even the finding and mould the relief to really make it appropriate towards 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-recognize the evidence or the nature of punishment. Over the aforesaid proposition, we are fortified by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Ghulam Murtaza Shaikh v. Chief Minister Sindh (2024 SCMR 1757). Read more

ninety six . Const. P. 4965/2023 (D.B.) Saleem Khan V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi It really is perfectly-settled that although considering the case of standard promotion of civil servants, the competent authority has got to think about the benefit of all the eligible candidates and after thanks deliberations, to grant promotion to these kinds of eligible candidates that are found to generally be most meritorious among them. Because the petitioner was held to get senior to his colleagues who were promoted in BS-19, the petitioner was overlooked by the respondent department just to extend favor to your blue-eyed candidate based on OPS, which is apathy on the part from the respondent department.

The appellant should have remained vigilant and raised his challenge into the Judgment within time. Read more

In federal or multi-jurisdictional law systems there may well exist conflicts between the various decreased appellate courts. Sometimes these differences may not be resolved, and it might be necessary to distinguish how the regulation is applied in one district, province, division or appellate department.

Therefore, this petition is found for being not maintainable and it is dismissed along with the pending application(s), and the petitioners may request remedies through the civil court process as discussed supra. Read more

Finally, a vital contribution of this case which was accepted for consideration from the Court under Article 184 (3), continues to be setting a precedent which allows for much less difficult access to the public to approach the superior courts and also the subordinate courts on environment related issues.

She did note that the boy still needed intensive therapy in order to cope with his abusive past, and “to get to the point of being Harmless with other children.” The boy was acquiring counseling with a DCFS therapist. Again, the court approved of the actions.

Persuasive Authority – Prior court rulings that can be consulted in deciding a current case. It may be used to guide the court, but will not be binding precedent.

In determining whether employees of DCFS are entitled to absolute immunity, which is generally held by certain government officials performing within the scope of their employment, the appellate court referred to case legislation previously rendered on similar cases.