Parameters

No court has the jurisdiction to grant arbitrary relief without the support of any power granted by the Constitution or the law

Any relief granted on the touchstone of subjective standards of leniency and compassion, rather than the law, cannot be sustained

Any such subjective decision disregards the importance of institutional autonomy; which rests on well-thought out values, ethos, policies and internal disciple of the institution.

No court has the jurisdiction to grant arbitrary relief without the support of any power granted by the Constitution or the law

Any relief granted on the touchstone of subjective standards of leniency and compassion, rather than the law, cannot be sustained

Any such subjective decision disregards the importance of institutional autonomy; which rests on well-thought out values, ethos, policies and internal disciple of the institution.

Observations recorded by the Supreme Court for adopting a single uniform compensation mechanism.

Purpose of visit of Departmental officers to premises of taxpayer under S.38 of Sales Tax Act, 1990 was to see whether proper records under the Act and Rules and Regulations thereunder had been maintained or not and for such visit, officer(s) must be authorized in this regard and must produce copy of such authorization before commencing inspection

Visit under S.38 of Sales Tax Act, 1990 must be confined to inspecting record and documents available in plain sight or such as may be voluntarily made available for inspection by person present on premises and only such records could be taken into custody by Department

Departmental officers had no power under S.38 of Sales Tax Act, 1990 to compel production of any record or document that was not in plain sight or had not been voluntarily made available to them; and any record taken into custody under compulsion could not be used for any purpose whatsoever by Department

Any action in contravention of such parameters would be wholly illegal and void

Section 40 of Sales Tax Act, 1990 provided procedure for search and seizure and as such controlled S.38's empowerment for access to record

Section 38 of Sales Tax Act, 1990 was merely an enabling provision and had nothing to do with regular search and seizure which could only be done as per S.40 of Sales Tax Act, 1990.

Nature and seriousness of offence with which a person is charged, the character, antecedents, associations and community ties of person; time which the person has already spent in custody and time which he is likely to spend in custody if he is not admitted to bail; and strength of evidence of his having committed offence are parameters under S.21-D(4) of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, for grant of bail.

Omission to disclose features and description of suspect in the FIR and statement made under S. 161, Cr.P.C. would render identification parade without legal sanctity

Identification proceedings were to be held as early as possible but no hard and fast rule could be formulated

Delay in holding identification test would reduce its value

Identification test was not to be held at police station

Separate identification parade was to be conducted for each accused

Whole proceedings of identification test including lining up accused with dummies was to be conducted by the Magistrate himself and not to be delegated to the jail authorities

Prior to conduct of proceedings, concerned authority would be under obligation to conceal the identity of the accused from one place to another place

Such measures were not only required to be taken but were to be proved to have been taken

Supervising Magistrate would be duty bound to make note of every objection made by accused at the time of parade enabling the court of competent jurisdiction to judge the genuineness of the objection while determining value of identification test

Number of dummies for each accused must be given

Description of dummies as to whether they were of the same structure, age etc. was to be mentioned

Number of dummies to be mixed with each accused was not to be less than nine or ten

No mark or stamp to be put on the suspect

Dummies and the suspect were to be almost of same structure and appearance

If there was any visible mark on the person of accused, like beard, it was advisable to mix up the accused with others of similar appearance

Role of each accused must be described by the witness

Witnesses were required to explain as to how and in what manner they were to identify or pick up the accused person.

Appellants were licensed broadcasting Media houses and Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority imposed penalty for airing a fake news of bomb blast

Validity

Powers delegated to Personal Hearing Committee were to see whether any provisions of Electronic Media (Programs and Advertisements) Code of Conduct, 2015, were violated for imposition of fine or penalty

Such was within the domain and parameters of S. 13 of Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority Ordinance, 2002

Personal Hearing Committee after hearing all satellite channels, local and national, recommended its views which could have formed a decision by the Authority

Recommendations could or could not be correct but delegation of power was lawful

Those who aired news in simple words as a 'blast' could find a rescue in terms of R. 3(1)(i) of Electronic Media (Programs and Advertisements) Code of Conduct, 2015, and recommendation of Personal Hearing Committee was not appropriate in general but for those who linked the news of blast with the first one by showing / airing it to be a 'second blast' or 'another blast' or 'as well' had definite intention to present it for viewers as if it was in continuity with earlier one

Said news presented it in continuity of earlier one to be within the parameters and clutches of cl. 3(1)(i) of Electronic Media (Programs and Advertisements) Code of Conduct, 2015, and did not find any reason for their escape under any mitigating circumstance

High Court declined to interfere in decision of the Authority for all those appellants who acted in violation of Cl. 3 (1)(i) of Electronic Media (Programs and Advertisements) Code of Conduct, 2015

High Court set aside the fine imposed upon those appellants who only aired the news as 'blast' could not be roped in Electronic Media (Programs and Advertisements) Code of Conduct, 2015, for imposition of fine as they had only aired a news of 'blast' not linking it with earlier blast, as the news was a fact as a blast had occurred

High Court defined parameters to be set to regulate balance in imposition of fine so that question of discrimination be not exercised

Appeal was allowed accord-ingly.

Appreciation of evidence in the appeal against conviction was done strictly and in the appeal against acquittal, such rigid method of appreciation of evidence would not be applied, as there was already finding of acquittal given by the Trial Court after proper analysis of evidence on record.

Even if another view was possible, the view favorable to the accused was to be preferred.

Appeal against conviction would be different and distinguishable from appeal against acquittal, because presumption of double innocence was attached in the case of "appeal against acquittal".

Order of acquittal could only be interfered with, if it was found on its face to be capricious, perverse, arbitrary in nature or based on misreading, non-reading of evidence or was artificial, arbitrary and led to gross miscarriage of justice

Mere disregard of technicalities in a criminal trial without resulting injustice was not enough for interference.

Appreciation of evidence, in appeal against conviction was done strictly and in appeal against acquittal such rigid method of appreciation of evidence was not to be applied.

Liberty of the citizens cannot be curtailed merely on presumptions, satisfaction, as described under S.11-EE of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, would be objective in nature and not subjective

Authorities are not to act on whims and caprices without there being any material before them in support of grounds for placing name of a person in Fourth Sched. of the Act.

Right of pre-arrest bail was limited to exceptional and rare cases which were based on mala fide, enmity or where no offence was shown to have been committed on the bare reading of FIR

Accused, in the present case, was specifically nominated in the FIR along with his co-accused for fraudulently collecting huge amount from innocent persons in the shape of plots of society

Owner of the property also registered a case against the accused persons

Further ad-interim pre-arrest bail was granted to the accused by the High Court but he did not join investigation

No case for the extra-ordinary concession of pre-arrest bail was made out

Pre-arrest bail was refused accordingly.

Appellate court reduced sentence from two years for each offence to one year two months for each offence and upheld the order regarding payment of Arsh and Daman

Both injured persons, during the trial, had pointed their fingers towards the accused as the culprit, who had caused the injuries on their persons with iron rod

Both the injured persons had been duly examined by the doctor, and the Medico-Legal Certificate bore the injuries attributed to the accused

Token of receipt of the injuries on persons of the victims unambiguously proved their presence at the spot

Both the injured persons were natural witnesses and they were in line with each other regarding culpability of the accused

Parties of the case were known to each other; therefore, there was no chance of false implication or mistaken identity of the accused

Statements of the injured person had found support from the statement of the inmate of the house, who was also a natural witness

Statements of the prosecution witnesses had also found sufficient support from the medical evidence, recovery of weapon of offence and motive of the occurrence

Contradiction between the medical evidence and ocular account although existed, as the Medico-Legal Certificate mentioned that the injured person had sustained injury on her left hand, both the injured persons had categorically stated before the Trial Court that said injured person had sustained injury on her right hand

Such being trivial could have been a typographical mistake on part of the doctor, and therefore, could not be made basis for acquittal of the accused

Such contradiction could not vitiate the whole structure of the prosecution evidence

Medical evidence could not be given preference over direct evidence adduced by the injured persons, whose statements were confidence inspiring

In all cases of hurt provided in Chap. XVI of P.P.C., Normal punishment in cases of hurt provided under Chap. XVI, P.P.C. was payment of Arsh or Daman and the optional additional punishment of imprisonment as Tazir provided for the relevant offence could be awarded to an offender only where the offender was either a previous convict, habitual or hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal or the offence committed by him was in the nature or on the pretext of honour

Sentence of imprisonment as Tazir in such an offence was not to be less than one-third of the maximum imprisonment period provided for the hurt caused

Accused was the first offender, as he had never been convicted and sentenced in any criminal case; therefore, sentence of one year and two months was not legally recognized

High Court, therefore, setting aside the impugned judgment to the extent of award of sentence of imprisonment, maintained the same regarding payment of Arsh, Diyat and Daman

Revision against conviction/ sentence was disposed of accordingly.

Court might examine entire material, motive and previous animosity between parties, while keeping direct complaint on record and lengthy litigation, agony and financial constraints being suffered by an innocent person

If complaint reflected malicious, mischievous and ulterior motives on the part of complainant, such pretended, false and frivolous complaints could be buried at their inception.

Accused, after the Accountability Court was informed that the defaulted amount had been repaid through a civil recovery suit, was simply deemed to have been convicted, presumably applying the consequences of S. 25(b) as per the proviso of S. 15(a) of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999

Since no written offer of plea bargain by the accused, acceptance by the Chairman, NAB and no approval of the plea bargain agreement between the accused and Chairman by the Accountability Court was available on the record, present case, therefore, did not amount to a plea bargain under S.25(b) of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 and S.15(a) of the Ordinance, therefore, would not be applicable to the accused

Unless the offences in question had been proved by admissible, cogent and reliable evidence beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution, the accused could not have been convicted

Prosecution had not led any evidence against the accused after framing of the charge

Neither the accused's statement under S.342, Cr.P.C. had been recorded, nor he had opportunity to call the defence witnesses

Accused could not have been convicted for any of the offences and the first part of S.15(a) of National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 would not be applicable to him, as he had not been formally convicted after recording of evidence

High Court, setting aside the impugned conviction order, remanded the case to the Accountability Court to proceed with the Reference against the accused on merits in accordance with law

Appeal was allowed accordingly.

Anti-Corruption police is neither conferred with any power nor authority to investigate a dispute regarding entries pertaining to private lands, nor does Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 permit the Anti-Corruption Police to entertain any complaint with regards to the title dispute between the private parties.

Accused was presumed innocent till adjudged guilty and this presumption of innocence was multiplied when he was acquitted by the court of competent jurisdiction.

Petitioners contended that Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Medical Teaching Institutions Reforms Act, 2015 had been passed to frustrate the judgments of the High Court and Supreme Court to undermine the independence of judiciary

Validity

Held, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Medical Teaching Institutions Reforms Act, 2015 had been validly and competently been enacted by the Provincial Legislature

Principles.

Petitioners contended that Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Medical Teaching Institutions Reforms Act, 2015 had been passed to frustrate the judgments of the High Court and Supreme Court to undermine the independence of judiciary

Validity

Held, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Medical Teaching Institutions Reforms Act, 2015 had been validly and competently been enacted by the Provincial Legislature

Principles.

Rights of surety under Chapter VIII of Contract Act, 1872 could be waived, and the waiver did not defeat any provision of law; therefore, recitals in the agreement of guarantee waiving rights under Chapter VIII of Contract Act, 1872 were not opposed to public policy.

Trial Court was bound to ask such question from accused under S. 342, Cr.P.C, which related to the root of the prosecution evidence and was made basis of his conviction

Incriminating evidence not put to the accused could not be used against him

Accused, therefore, would be prejudiced, if questions put to the accused in his examination under S. 342, Cr.P.C. did not focus on the evidence available on the record.

Registrar, while acting under S. 123(1) of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001, can only extend the time for doing any act for which the time limit is not so expressly provided in the Ordinance

Section 28 of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001 specifically provides that an opposition can be filed within an initial period of two months or after a further extended period of additional two months in aggregate

Registrar, therefore, is handicapped under S. 123(1) of Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001 from exercising any power to extend the time limit for filing an opposition beyond the time limit of four months.

Bail can be granted under Constitutional jurisdiction and parameters for grant and refusal of bail are the same as defined under Ss.497 & 498, Cr.P. C.