misrepresentation case law Can Be Fun For Anyone
misrepresentation case law Can Be Fun For Anyone
Blog Article
Article 199 from the Constitution allows High Court intervention only when "no other adequate remedy is provided by law." It really is very well-settled that an aggrieved person must exhaust offered 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
93 . Const. P. 642/2023 (D.B.) Fatima Noor V/S Dow University of Health Science and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi Coming towards the main case, it is also a well-founded proposition of law 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 succeed in 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 inside the Stricto-Sensu, use to disciplinary proceedings. When the authority accepts that evidence and conclusion get support therefrom, the disciplinary authority is entitled to hold that the delinquent officer is guilty of the charge, however, that is subject matter for the procedure provided under the relevant rules and not otherwise, with the reason that the Court in its power of judicial review does not act as appellate authority to re-value the evidence and to reach at its independent findings to the evidence.
4. It's been noticed by this Court that there is often a delay of sooner or later inside the registration of FIR which hasn't been explained from the complainant. Moreover, there is no eye-witness of the alleged occurrence as well as the prosecution is counting on the witnesses of extra judicial confession. The evidence of extra judicial confession in the petitioners is 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 transpired to become the real brothers from the deceased but they didn't react in the slightest degree on the confessional statements of the petitioners and calmly observed them leaving, 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 fourteen.02.2018 and there is not any explanation regarding why her arrest was not effected after making from the alleged extra judicial confession. It's been held on a lot of occasions that extra judicial confession of an accused is usually a weak sort of evidence which may very well be manoeuvred via the prosecution in almost any case where direct connecting evidence does not come their way. The prosecution is additionally depending 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 as to presence of some light in the place, where they allegedly observed the petitioners alongside one another on a motorcycle at 4.
Typically, the burden rests with litigants to appeal rulings (including All those in crystal clear violation of set up case law) to your higher courts. If a judge acts against precedent, as well as the case is just here not appealed, the decision will stand.
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................
4. It goes without indicating that observations made hereinabove are just tentative in nature and strictly confined on the disposal of immediate bail petition.
Where there are several members of a court deciding a case, there could be 1 or more judgments given (or reported). Only the reason for the decision of your majority can represent a binding precedent, but all may very well be cited as persuasive, or their reasoning can be adopted within an argument.
whether though granting promotion senior employees were regarded as for promotion or otherwise and submit the compliance report.(Promotion)
P.C. Liability of petitioners to the claimed offences would be determined from the discovered trial Court after sifting the evidentiary well worth in the material developed before the same. Till then, case of
Therefore, this petition is found being not maintainable and is dismissed along with the pending application(s), and the petitioners could look for remedies through the civil court process as discussed supra. Read more
In the event the employee fails to provide a grievance notice, the NIRC may perhaps dismiss the grievance petition. This is because the employer hasn't had an opportunity to answer the grievance and attempt to resolve it. In a few cases, the NIRC may well allow the employee to amend the grievance petilion to include the grievance notice. However, this is normally only completed In the event the employee can show that that they had a good reason for not serving the grievance notice. From the present case, the parties were allowed to lead evidence as well as petitioner company responded towards the allegations therefore they were very well mindful of the allegations and led the evidence as a result this point is ofno use to become seemed 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 over the same kind of case.
However, it’s essential to note that the application of the death penalty is subject matter to several legal safeguards and owing process to make certain fair trials.
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 from 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.