nine . Const. P. 255/2025 (S.B.) Zubaida W/O Muhammad Irfan V/S Inspector General of Police (IGP) Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi The regulation enjoins the police to generally be scrupulously fair to the offender and also the Magistracy is to make sure a fair investigation and fair trial for an offender. Unfortunately, these objectives have remained unfulfilled. Aberrations of police officers and police excesses in dealing with the legislation and order situation have been the topic of adverse comments from this Court and from other courts Nonetheless they have didn't have any corrective effect on it. The police has the power to arrest a person even without obtaining a warrant of arrest from a court. The a lot of this power casts an obligation around the police and it must bear in mind, as held by this Court that if a person is arrested for a crime, his constitutional and fundamental rights must not be violated.
How much sway case legislation holds may perhaps differ by jurisdiction, and by the precise circumstances with the current case. To take a look at this concept, look at the following case law definition.
However, decisions rendered from the Supreme Court with the United States are binding on all federal courts, and on state courts regarding issues with the Constitution and federal legislation.
The a good amount of this power casts an obligation over the police and it must bear in mind, as held by this Court that if a person is arrested for a crime, his constitutional and fundamental rights must not be violated. However it's made obvious that police is free to acquire action against any person who is indulged in criminal activities issue to regulation. 8. The DIGP concerned is directed to prioritize this matter and, after hearing both parties within two weeks, address the alleged police misconduct. Should the officials are found culpable, departmental proceedings for their punishment must be initiated, they usually shall be assigned non-industry duties from the interim period. Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Writer) Source: Order: Downloads 113 Order Date: 08-APR-25 Approved for Reporting WhatsApp
13. The Supreme Court has held that once the act of misconduct is established as well as employee is found guilty after thanks process of law, it's the prerogative of your employer to decide the quantum of punishment, out of the varied penalties provided in legislation. The casual or unpremeditated observation that the penalty imposed will not be proportionate with the seriousness with the act of misconduct is not really satisfactory even so the order must show that the competent authority has applied its mind and exercised the discretion in a very structured and lawful fashion. Read more
In order to preserve a uniform enforcement of the laws, the legal system adheres on the doctrine of stare decisis
When the state court hearing the case reviews the regulation, he finds that, whilst it mentions large multi-tenant properties in a few context, it's actually quite imprecise about whether the 90-day provision relates to all landlords. The judge, based around the specific circumstances of Stacy’s case, decides that all landlords are held to the 90-working day notice prerequisite, and rules in Stacy’s favor.
The legislation as established in previous court rulings; like common regulation, which springs from judicial decisions and tradition.
161 . 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-established 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 read more based on some evidence, the authority entrusted with the power to hold inquiry has jurisdiction, power, and authority to reach a finding of fact or conclusion. But that finding must be based on some evidence. Neither the technical rules nor proof of a fact or evidence during the Stricto-Sensu, implement to disciplinary proceedings. When the authority accepts that evidence and conclusion obtain support therefrom, the disciplinary authority is entitled to hold that the delinquent officer is guilty of the charge, however, that is topic to the procedure provided under the relevant rules instead of otherwise, for that reason that the Court in its power of judicial review does not work as appellate authority to re-value the evidence and to reach at its independent findings on the evidence.
Article 27 of the Constitution does not only safeguard against discrimination for the time of appointment of service but after the appointment as well. The disparity from the pay out scale allowances of Stenographers from the District Judiciary is inside the crystal clear negation of your legislation laid down with the Supreme Court in its numerous pronouncements. Read more
182 . Const. P. 6025/2024 (D.B.) Dr. Pritam Das V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi So far as the stance of your respondents that pensionary benefits may be withheld on account of the allegations leveled against the petitioner, in our view, section 20 of the Sindh Civil Servants Act of 1973 deals with the pension and gratuity that civil servants are entitled to. However, the act does provide for certain circumstances under which a civil servant's pension could possibly be withheld or reduced. These include things like if a civil servant is found guilty of misconduct or negligence during their service, their pension might be withheld or reduced. If a civil servant is convicted of a serious crime, their pension could possibly be withheld or reduced. In certain cases, a civil servant's pension could be withheld or reduced if he/she fails to comply with certain conditions set because of the government.
Summaries of cases that form the lives of youthful individuals, making sure a deeper understanding of justice within the juvenile system. Knowledge that matters, crafted for legal professionals and lovers alike.
156 . Const. P. 1015/2021 (D.B.) Muhammad Saleem Jehangir V/S Province of Sindh and Others Sindh High Court, Karachi It is also important to note that neither seniority nor promotion could be the vested right of the civil servant, therefore, neither any seniority nor any promotion could possibly be claimed or granted without the actual duration of service on account of vested rights. The purpose of prescribing a particular length of service for starting to be entitled to become regarded for promotion to the 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 serve over the said post to gain experience to hold the next higher post and also to provide the public inside a befitting method.
Matter:-SERVICE Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Author) 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 very well-established 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 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 from the Stricto-Sensu, implement to disciplinary proceedings. When the authority accepts that evidence and summary acquire support therefrom, the disciplinary authority is entitled to hold that the delinquent officer is guilty of your charge, however, that is issue into the procedure provided under the relevant rules rather than otherwise, to the reason that the Court in its power of judicial review does not work as appellate authority to re-take pleasure in the evidence and to reach at its independent findings about the evidence.