Article 199 of your Constitution allows High Court intervention only when "no other ample remedy is provided by regulation." It is actually well-settled that an aggrieved person must exhaust accessible remedies before invoking High Court jurisdiction, regardless of whether These remedies suit them. The doctrine of exhaustion of remedies prevents unnecessary High Court litigation. Read more
fourteen. Inside the light from the position explained higher than, it is actually concluded that a civil servant has a fundamental right to become promoted even after his retirement by awarding proforma promotion; provided, his right of promotion accrued during his service but could not be considered for no fault of his own and In the meantime he retired on attaining the age of superannuation without any shortcoming on his part about deficiency within the duration of service or in the form of inquiry and departmental action was so taken against his right of promotion. Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author) Source: Order: Downloads 269 Order Date: 24-JAN-25 Approved for Reporting WhatsApp
In this landmark case, the Supreme Court commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment to the grounds of extenuating circumstances. The court acknowledged that when the crime of murder was set up, the offender experienced a history of mental illness, which played a significant role in committing the offense. This case set a precedent for looking at mitigating factors during sentencing.
Deterrence: The panic of severe outcomes, which include capital punishment, is meant to prevent prospective criminals from committing murder. This deterrent effect is very important in reducing the occurrence of intentional killings.
These past decisions are called "case regulation", or precedent. Stare decisis—a Latin phrase meaning "Allow the decision stand"—is the principle check here by which judges are bound to such past decisions, drawing on recognized judicial authority to formulate their positions.
It allows individuals to research legal issues, understand their rights, and prepare for legal proceedings. This access is particularly important in Pakistan, where legal support is often costly and tricky to get.
In this case, the Supreme Court of Pakistan upheld the death penalty for that accused who intentionally murdered the victim.
In fact, this provision nullifies the difference between manslaughter and murder. Section 318 on the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 defines Qatl-i-khata (manslaughter) as “Whoever, without intention to cause the death of or cause harm into a person causes death of these types of person, either by mistake of act or by mistake of fact is alleged to commit qatl-i-khata.”
In 1997, the boy was placed into the home of John and Jane Roe for a foster child. Although the couple experienced two younger children of their very own at home, the social worker did not notify them about the boy’s history of both being abused, and abusing other children. When she made her report on the court the following working day, the worker reported the boy’s placement from the Roe’s home, but didn’t mention that the few had youthful children.
The law of necessity acknowledged and upheld by Pakistan's highest judicial body has proved an honorable protection for military adventure in civil government.it had been the illegal action called law of necessity..
Legal Defenses: An accused person charged under Section 302 PPC can present legal defenses for example self-defense, insanity, or accidental killing, which may end in reduced charges or acquittal.
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؟
Здесь представлены рекомендации и описания способов лечения данным заболеванием.
The necessary analysis (called ratio decidendi), then constitutes a precedent binding on other courts; further analyses not strictly necessary into the determination in the current case are called obiter dicta, which represent persuasive authority but will not be technically binding. By contrast, decisions in civil law jurisdictions are generally shorter, referring only to statutes.[four]