Dispensation of justice
Dispensation of justice legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Justice must not only be done, it should be seen to be done.
Dispensation of justice is not alone function of courts but public functionaries are equally responsible to act fairly, justly and in accordance in law being trustees of public power
Where public functionaries have failed to perform their duties or they act illegally or in excess of their jurisdiction relating to public duties, any concerned person can invoke Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court
Term 'aggrieved person' under Art. 199 of the Constitution is not confined to a person having strict legal right but it may extend to any person having legitimate interest in performance of a public duty.
All persons placed in a similar situation, affected by any law, statutory rule, regulation, notification or policy etc., are to be treated even handedly and in like manner
Public functionaries, invariably derive and force every person affected by law, statutory rules, etc. to approach the court of law to obtain similar relief rather than extending similar relief by itself on the basis of principle of law that has been earlier set at rest
Such conduct of public functionaries is neither desirable nor can be approved as it negates even handed dispensation of justice and meting out equal treatment as mandated per Articles 25 and 10-A of the Constitution.
"Dispensation of justice", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124931987
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Dispensation of justice"
1987 S C M R 456
GHULAM MURTAZA alias BHOPAL and another Petitioners Versus THE STATE Respondent
Court: High Court1984 S C M R 412 (1)
MUHAMMAD ANWAR-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent
Court: ---- Art. 185(3)-Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 426-Leave to appeal granted by Supreme Court on ground that evidence on record not justifying detention of accused-Conviction of accused resting on sole testimony of witness which required re-appraisal for safe dispensation of justice---Being not possible to foreclose opinion on appraisal of evidence while considering question of grant of bail to accused, held, not justified to grant bail, in circumstances.-Evidence.P L D 2000 Lahore 623
THE STATE‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD AFAQ, ADVOCATE, LAHORE‑‑‑Respondent
Court:1968 P Cr
MUHAMMAD MAZHAR alias ZUHRI‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: Supreme Court1969 S C M R 43
N/A
Court: High Court1987 S C M R 955
MUHAMMAD SHABBIR‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD ASLAM and another‑‑Respondents
Court: High Court1984 S C M R 1217
FAROOQ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Court: ---Art. 185(3)--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302--Murder--Courts below found not to have acted upon important features of evidence such as sudden attack on deceased; role assigned to accomplices of accused; time of occurrence and nature of injuries other than fatal injury on person of deceased--Leave to appeal--Granted to re-appraise such features in evidence for safe dispensation of justice. --Evidence.1996 S C M R 973
Mst. NUSRAT‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent,
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan2001 P Cr
SAMUEL PETER‑‑‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
Court: KarachiP L D 1985 Lahore 77 ,
SHAUKAT-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent
Court: -- S. 497(1)(6)-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302/148 & 149Bail-Delay in commencement, completion or conclusion of trial not in any way attributable to accused-Accused, held, entitled to concession of bail as provided by S. 497(1)(6), Cr. P. C.-Delay.