Google Scholar – an enormous database of state and federal case regulation, which is searchable by keyword, phrase, or citations. Google Scholar also allows searchers to specify which level of court cases to search, from federal, to specific states.
In Dosso's case (1958), the Pakistan Supreme Court used jurist Hans Kelsen's theory that a revolution is often justified when the basic norm underlying a Constitution disappears and a new system is set in its place.
Matter:-HARASSMENT Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Writer) Const. P. 1479/2024 (S.B.) Mst. Shir Bano and another V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi SHC Citation: SHC-252214 Tag:Primarily, this is really a free and democratic state, and once a person becomes a major she or he can marry whosoever he/she likes; If your parents on the boy or Lady usually do not approve of this kind of inter-caste or interreligious marriage the most they are able to do if they are able to Minimize off social relations with the son or perhaps the daughter, However they cannot give threats or commit or instigate for acts of violence and cannot harass the person who undergoes such inter-caste or inter-religious marriage. I therefore, direct that the administration/police authorities will see, if any boy or Lady that's major undergoes inter-caste or inter-religious marriage with a woman or gentleman who is a major, the few is neither harassed by anyone nor subjected to threats or acts of violence and anybody who provides these threats or harasses or commits acts of violence either himself or at his instigation, is taken to process by instituting criminal proceedings with the police against these kinds of persons and further stern action is taken against these types of person(s) as provided by regulation.
The necessary analysis (called ratio decidendi), then constitutes a precedent binding on other courts; further analyses not strictly necessary for the determination from the current case are called obiter dicta, which constitute persuasive authority but usually are not technically binding. By contrast, decisions in civil law jurisdictions are generally shorter, referring only to statutes.[4]
13 . Const. P. 209/2025 (S.B.) Saifullah Jamali (Disable) V/S Province of Sindh and others Sindh High Court, Karachi After arguing the matter at some length, both parties have agreed for the disposal of the moment petition to the premise that the DIGP Malir will hear the petitioner along with private respondents and will just take care of many of the aspects of the case and make sure that no harassment shall be caused to both the parties.
In order to preserve a uniform enforcement with the laws, the legal system adheres towards the doctrine of stare decisis
PLR is really a revolutionizing platform democratizing and making legal research easy and accessible in Pakistan :
Because of this, simply just citing the case is more more likely to annoy a judge than help the party’s case. Consider it as calling somebody to inform them you’ve found their dropped phone, then telling them you live in this kind of-and-these types of neighborhood, without actually giving them an address. Driving round the neighborhood trying to find their phone is probably going to become more frustrating than it’s worth.
163 . Const. P. 4965/2023 (D.B.) Saleem Khan V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi It truly is nicely-settled that though taking into consideration the case of regular promotion of civil servants, the competent authority has to take into account the merit of all of the eligible candidates and after thanks deliberations, to grant promotion to these kinds of suitable candidates that are found being most meritorious among them. Because the petitioner was held to become senior to his colleagues who were promoted in BS-19, the petitioner was ignored from the respondent department just to increase favor for the blue-eyed candidate based on OPS, which is apathy on the part with the respondent department.
This Court may possibly interfere where the authority held the proceedings against the delinquent officer in the method inconsistent with the rules of natural justice or in violation of statutory rules prescribing the mode of inquiry or where the conclusion or finding achieved via the disciplinary authority is based on no evidence. If your summary or finding is for example no reasonable person would have ever achieved, the Court may interfere with the summary or perhaps the finding and mould the relief to really make it acceptable for the facts of each case. In service jurisprudence, the disciplinary authority is the sole judge of facts. Where the appeal is presented, the appellate authority has coextensive power to re-value the evidence or maybe the nature of punishment. On the aforesaid proposition, we are fortified by the decision of your Supreme Court within the case of Ghulam Murtaza Shaikh v. Chief Minister Sindh (2024 SCMR 1757). Bench: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Muhammad Karim Khan Agha, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adnan-ul-Karim Memon(Creator) Source: Order: Downloads 337 Order Date: 24-JAN-twenty five Approved for Reporting WhatsApp
182 . Const. P. 6025/2024 (D.B.) Dr. Pritam Das V/S Province of Sindh & Others Sindh High Court, Karachi As far as the stance from the respondents that pensionary benefits could possibly be withheld on account with the allegations leveled against the petitioner, inside our view, section 20 in the Sindh Civil Servants Act of 1973 deals with the pension and gratuity that civil servants are entitled to. However, the act does supply for certain circumstances under which a civil servant's pension can be withheld or reduced. These involve 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 significant crime, their pension might be withheld or reduced. In certain cases, a civil servant's pension may be withheld or reduced if he/she fails to comply with certain conditions set through the government.
The appellate court determined that the trial court experienced not erred in its decision to allow more time for information to generally be gathered via the parties – specifically regarding the issue of absolute immunity.
Because of their position between the two main systems of law, these types of legal systems are sometimes referred to as mixed systems of regulation.
Criminal cases While get more info in the common law tradition, courts decide the regulation applicable into a case by interpreting statutes and applying precedents which record how and why prior cases have been decided. Compared with most civil law systems, common regulation systems Keep to the doctrine of stare decisis, by which most courts are bound by their personal previous decisions in similar cases. According to stare decisis, all decreased courts should make decisions constant with the previous decisions of higher courts.