Legal Blog

Even one or two days unexplained delay in recording the statement of eye-witnesses U/S 161 CrPC would be fatal and testimony of such witnesses could not be safely relied upon. 2019 YLR NOTE 25

An Act to amend and reform the law relating to partition of immovable property. THE PUNJAB PARTITION OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY ACT 2012 (Act IV of 2013) [5 January 2013] An Act to amend and reform the law relating to partition of immovable property. Preamble.– Whereas it is expedient to amend and reform the law relating to

Law vision (Pakistan) Providing Legal Consultancy to Muslims living Abroad for Court Marriage nikah You have only to contact us. And provide the following Documents Scanned by E-Mail or Photo Copies on Our Courier address: ID Cards of both Sides Photos of Both sides Cell Numbers of both Parties Permanent Address of the Both Present

A Bill further to amend the Family Courts Act, 1964 THE PUNJAB FAMILY COURTS (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2015 Bill No. 14 of 2015 A Bill further to amend the Family Courts Act, 1964 Whereas it is expedient further to amend the Family Court Act, 1964 (XXXV of 1964), for purposes hereinafter appearing; It is enacted as

2008 CLC 418 Suit for permanent injunction is not maintainable unless plaintiff shows some right, title and interest in suit property.. 2008 CLC 1328 In a suit for partition, plaintiff was permitted to repair or construct new house upon his own risk and cost after submitting affidavit. PLD 2012 Sindh 443 When order of any

S. 302–Appreciation of evidence–It would be “Better to err in acquittal than to err in conviction”. Administration of Justice– —-S. 302–If participation of same of accused is found suspicious, search for real offender on basis of a guess, game would have inherent risks, as possibility of an error cannot be eliminated altogether and thus may

Following principles are laid by High Court for grant of “Physical Remand”. (1) During first 15 days, the Magistrate may authorise the detention of the accused in judicial custody liberally but shall not authorise the detention in the custody of the police except on strong and excep¬tional grounds and that too, for the shortest possible

High Court had the Power to Quash FIR but that was to be Exercised in extra Ordinary Circumstances when No offence was made out on the face of the record or other Circumstances of the Similar Nature. High Court could not investigate the disputed Question of facts while exercising Constitutional Jurisdiction. 2018 PCr.LJ 1051

Protection against arbitrary or unlawful arrest (Article 22 of the Constitution and Section 41, 55 and 151 of Cr.P.C.) Protection against arbitrary or unlawful searches (Sec. 93, 94, 97, 100(4) to (8). and 165 of Cr.P.C.) Protection against “Double Jeopardy” (Article 20(2) of the Constitution and Section 300 of Cr.P.C.) Protection against conviction or enhanced