Duration
Duration legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Investigation in narcotics cases is not limited to mere recovery of narcotic substance from peddler but extends to the source, manufacturer, cultivator, seller, dealer, etc.
Magistrate while dealing with request of remand should give due consideration to facts and circumstances of the case and the scheme of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and grant physical remand of accused for a reasonable period
Investigating complete chain in commission of offence (including source of supply) under Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and tracing the assets derived out of such illicit trade/dealing is the duty of investigating agency and not a discretion
Investigating officer should investigate all persons and trace their assets involved in commission of offence under Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997.
Petitioner assaild disqualification of respondent by Chief Court from membership of Gilgit-Baltistan Assembly for remaining period of term of Assembly on account of his name placed in Fourth Schedule to Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997
Validity
Disqualifying respondent from the seat of Gilgit-Baltistan Assembly for period of remaining term of Legislative Assembly did not comply with mandatory provision of S.232(2) of Elections Act, 2017 [as amended vide Elections (Amendment) Act, 2023]
Surepme Appellate Court set aside observation of Chief Court pertaining to disqualification of respondent from the seat of Gilgit-Baltistan Assembly for remaining term of Legislative Assembly, as period of disqualification of respondent was for five years as per spirit of S.232(2) of Elections Act, 2017 [as amended vide Elections (Amendment) Act, 2023]
Mere placing of name of respondent in Fourth Schedule to Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 could not be equated with conviction mentioned in Art. 63(1)(g) and (h) of Constitution of Pakistan
Conviction was either an imprisonment or fine which was imposed after framing of charge, recording of evidence of parties and also recording stance of accused in his defence
Order passed under S. 11-EE of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 could not be equated with conviction
On mere basis of inclusion of name of petitioner in Fourth Schedule to Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, it could not be held that he had worked against integrity of country or ideology of Pakistan
This was no ground for his disqualification under S.231 of Elections Act, 2017
Supreme Appellate Court set aside observation of Chief Court, as no act of petitioner had come within the ambit of corrupt practices
Appeal was allowed accordingly.
Attachment of property, under S. 9(5) of Anti-Money Laundering Act, 2010, ceases to have effect if on conclusion of trial of both the offences of money laundering and predicate offence the person concerned is acquitted.
Attachment of property, under S. 9(5) of Anti-Money Laundering Act, 2010, ceases to have effect if on conclusion of trial of both the offences of money laundering and predicate offence the person concerned is acquitted.
To stretch or continue acting charge or ad hoc arrangement on own pay scale (OPS) for an extensive period rather than making timely appointments or filling the post by promotion according to the ratio or quota, as the case may be, creates misgivings and suspicions and such a tendency is highly destructive and deteriorative to the civil service structure
Where appointments on current or acting charge basis are necessary in the public interest, such appointments should not continue indefinitely and every effort should be made to fill posts through regular appointments in shortest possible time.
To stretch or continue acting charge or ad hoc arrangement on own pay scale (OPS) for an extensive period rather than making timely appointments or filling the post by promotion according to the ratio or quota, as the case may be, creates misgivings and suspicions and such a tendency is highly destructive and deteriorative to the civil service structure
Where appointments on current or acting charge basis are necessary in the public interest, such appointments should not continue indefinitely and every effort should be made to fill posts through regular appointments in shortest possible time.
Attachment of property, under S. 9(5) of Anti-Money Laundering Act, 2010, ceases to have effect if on conclusion of trial of both the offences of money laundering and predicate offence the person concerned is acquitted.
Whenever office of Chief Minister falls vacant, the same has to be filled promptly by election keeping in view desire of the Constitution and Rr. 17, 18, 19 & 20 of Rules of Procedure of the Provincial Assembly of the Punjab, 1997, framed under the mandate of the Constitution in terms of Arts. 67 & 127 of the Constitution, which provide procedure for completion of election within two unified days from summoning of the Session.
Plea raised by petitioner was that under S.82 of Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1967, period of detention could not exceed 30 days
Validity
Special procedure prescribed under S.13(3) of Family Courts Act, 1964, could be followed by Family Court through a specific order
In absence of such order, ordinary mode for execution prescribed under Civil Procedure Code, 1908, was applicable
No specific order was passed by Executing Court to follow procedure provided under Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1967, therefore, term of civil imprisonment was not to be governed under S.82 of Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1967 but provision of S.55 read with O.XXI, C.P.C. was applicable under which civil imprisonment for failure to pay decretal amount could be up to one year
Detention of petitioner more than one month was not illegal nor against the provisions of S.13(3) of Family Courts Act, 1964
Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances.
Petitioner was a taxpayer and his grievance was that despite pendency of appeal before Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue, authorities were bent upon to recover disputed amount
Validity
Time specified in S. 131(5) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 was directory and therefore, if appeal was not decided within said period, stay would continue till disposal or decision of appeal unless expressly recalled by Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue
Any other interpretation to provision of S. 131(5) of Income Tax Ordinance, 2001 would defeat the legislative intent of protecting a taxpayer against undue hardship
High Court declared that stay granted by Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue would continue to remain effective till disposal/decision of appeal unless expressly recalled after affording an opportunity of hearing
High Court observed that Appellate Tribunal Inland Revenue was expected to decide the appeal expeditiously
Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.
Petitioner was accused facing trial before Accountability Court and his grievance was that his accounts could not be frozen for unlimited period
Validity
Freezing order and its confirmation period was limited by law for a reasonable time, therefore, no property should be ordered to be frozen for an unlimited period
Purpose of request for confirmation of freezing order of Chairman NAB was to secure ill-gotten property from its disposal before decision of reference by Trial Court
Chairman NAB could pass order to freeze property on the basis of all possible evidence and material collected by investigating officer against accused
Period of fifteen days provided by National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, was to enable Chairman to prepare reference and send to court along with request for confirmation of freezing order
Such request was made by prosecutor, without reference, who was not certain as to when reference would be filed
Order passed by Trial Court confirming freezing of property, without reference, was considered to be for an unlimited period and the same was not only contrary to law but was also against provisions of Art. 23 of the Constitution
Pre-condition for confirmation of freezing order was that if there appeared reasonable ground for believing that accused has committed such offence and for believing that a person had committed an offence, there must have been some material before Trial Court
When no reference was filed before Trial Court, Trial Court, while confirming freezing order could not possibly believe that accused had committed offence under National Accountability Ordinance, 1999
High Court set aside order passed by Trial Court, as the same was contrary to provisions of S.12 of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, and accounts frozen by Trial Court were released forthwith
Appeal was allowed, in circumstances.
Very wide discretion has been conferred by law on Rent Controller to fix fair rent from the date of application or from the date of order and in suitable cases even from a date in between the two events
Discretion vested in Rent Controller or appellate authority is not arbitrary or whimsical
Discretion in fixing fair rent as well as period from which it would be made payable is to be exercised judiciously with great care and caution, being in the nature of public trust.
Employee whose services were terminated on certain charges of misconduct after issuing him show-cause notice and holding inquiry against him, filed grievance petition, which petition having been dismissed by the Labour Court, employee had filed appeal along with other employees against judgment of the Labour Court
Establishment issued letter to employee narrating entire background of alleged incident and directed employee to appear before the Inquiry Officer
Inquiry Officer issued another notice to employee to take part in the inquiry proceedings and duly provided opportunity of cross-examination to employee
Contention of counsel for employee that neither any charge-sheet/show-cause notice was issued nor any opportunity of hearing was given to the employee, had no force, in circumstances
Counsel for employee had himself produced inquiry report in evidence before the Labour Court and no effort was made to summon the complete record of inquiry report or, Inquiry Officer by the employee
Court below, in circumstances had rightly taken into consideration the inquiry report in evidence
Alleged incident in the premises of the establishment had not been denied and criminal proceedings were also pending in the court
Stand taken by the employee that he had not participated in the said incident occurred in the premises of the establishment, had not been supported by any independent witness on behalf of the employee
Employee had himself admitted in cross-examination that no enmity existed between the witnesses produced by the establishment in inquiry proceedings
Charge-sheet was issued to the employee and consequently an inquiry was conducted on the allegation of misconduct and employee had participated in that inquiry and on the basis of the report of Inquiry Officer the order for termination of service of employee was passed by the establishment
Labour court, in circumstances had properly appreciated the record and passed impugned judgment in accordance with law.
"Duration", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124931772
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Duration"
P
ALLAH DI WAYA‑Appellant Versus Mst. MUKHTIAR BEGUM‑Respondent
Court:1986 P Cr
ALLAH BAKHSH Appellant Versus THE STATE and other Respondent
Court: Lahore1992 P L C 1299
Haji ABDUL MAJEED SAJID Versus SOGEA (PAKISTAN BRANCH), KARACHI INTERNATIONAL
Court: Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh1986 P Cr
MUHAMMAD BUX Appellant Versus THE STATE Respondent
Court: Karachi2021 M L D 1215
QURATULAIN IBRAHIM ARAIN — Petitioner Versus GOVERNMENT OF SINDH through Secretary Health and 4 others — Respondents
Court: SindhP L D 1967 Dacca 820
MURAMMAD SERAJ‑Appellant Versus PAKISTAN AND OTHERS‑Respondents
Court:2003 P L C (C
MUJAHID HUSSAIN NAQVI Versus Sardar RAFIQUE MEHMOOD KHAN and 8 others
Court: Supreme Court (AJ&K)P L D 2021 Balochistan 55
GHULAM RASOOL — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent
Court: High Court2022 Y L R 2157
HAMEED ULLAH KHAN — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MIANWALI and 3 others — Respondents
Court: Lahore