Home Maxims & Terms Cognizance by court meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Cognizance by court

Cognizance by court legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2019 PCrLJN 91 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
S. 173Investigation reportCognizance by courtPrinciple

Ipsi dixit opinion of Investigating Officer was not binding.

2018 YLR 676 FEDERAL-SHARIAT-COURT Judicial Precedent
S.173Investigation report of FIRCognizance by courtPrinciples

Opinion of Investigating Officer who supervised the investigation in FIR concluding falsity of allegations by no stretch of imagination could be taken into consideration.

2017 MLD 1993 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
S.173Investigation ReportCognizance by courtPrinciplesIpsi dixit opinion of Investigating Officer is not binding upon Court

Trial Court can take cognizance of offences even in case of negative report submitted by police that accusation is baseless and no case is made out against the delinquents.

2017 MLD 1993 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
Ss.173, 249-A, 265-K & 561-ACognizance by courtInherent Jurisdiction of High Court

Grievance of accused was that Trial Court had wrongly taken cognizance in the case though the Investigating Officer submitted his report under S.173, Cr.P.C. in 'C' class

Validity

Case of accused was that no such incident had taken place as alleged in FIR but such fact was denied by prosecution

Words against words existed and factual controversies were floating on the surface of record with regard to facts of the case and the same could not be decided by High Court at such a stage

Trial Court had already taken cognizance of the case, the FIR registration in that case could not be quashed and the fate of the case and accused persons challaned therein was to be determined by Trial Court itself

If after taking cognizance of the case by Trial Court, accused deemed himself to be innocent and falsely implicated and he wished to avoid the rigors of trial, then the law had provided him a remedy under Ss.249-A/295-K, Cr.P.C., to seek his premature acquittal from Trial Court if the charge against him was groundless or there was no probability of his conviction

Remedy was available to accused for rederssal of his grievances by approaching to Trial Court for filing proper application in support of his case

Application was dismissed in circumstances.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Cognizance by court", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124963251

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Cognizance by court"

PLD 1960
Second Appeal No. 462 of 1958, decided on 31st July 1959.

P L D 1960 Dacca 608

HAMEDALI FAKIR‑Appellant Versus KAZI ABDUL KHALEQ AND OTHERS‑Respondents

Court:
PCRLJ 1979
1978-August-28

1979 P Cr

ALI HUSSAIN-Applicant Versus THE STATE-Respondent

Court: Karachi
PLD 1960
Civil Rule No. 861 of 1959, decided on 24th February, 1960.

P L D 1960 Dacca 907

MAJID BISWAS AND OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus ADILUQDIN SHAIKH‑Opposite‑Party

Court:
PCRLJ 2022
2022-January-10

2022 P Cr

JUNAID MASEEH — Petitioner Versus The STATE through PS CTW, FIA, Islamabad and 2 others — Respondents

Court: Islamabad
MLD 2017
2015-August-20

2017 M L D 1993

NADEEM AKHTAR BUTT — Applicant Versus The VITH JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE MALIR, KARACHI and another — Respondents

Court: Sindh
PLD 1959
Letters Patent Appeal No. 37 of 1953, decided on 11th March 1959.

P L D 1959 (W

SALIM ULLAH BEG — Appellant Versus Mst. MOTIA BEGUM and another-Defendant-Respondents

Court:
PLD 1978
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 503/Q of 1977, decided on 19th December 1977.

1978 P L D Lahore 1082

LAHORE-Petitioner Versus Ch. RIAZ AHMAD AND ANOTHER-Respondents

Court: S. 295-A read with Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 196Cogniaance of offence-Mere fact of entertaining a complaint and recording statement of complainant on oath and some other preliminary evidence or summoning of witnesses-Does not amount to taking of cognizance by Court-Private complaint under S. 295-A,1'. P. C. filed by an unauthorized person, in disregard of S. 196, Cr. P. C. Proceedings before trial Court, held, without jurisdiction notwithstanding Court having recorded preliminary evidence.-Cognizance of offenceComplaint.
MLD 1998
1996-October-2

1998 M L D 379

Mst. IQBAL SAJJAD — Petitioner Versus Syed FARZAND ALI and 2 others — Respondents

Court: Lahore
CLC 1986
Civil Revision No. 1374 of 1980, decided on 8th October, 1985.

1986 C L C 2057

Mst. GHULAM FATIMA — Appellant Versus FAZAL and others — Respondents

Court: ---Ss. 100, 102 & 115--Second appeal--Right of--Conversion of revision into second appeal--At time of institution of suit party having right to prefer second appeal, held, would have such right intact in spite of subsequent amendment of -S. 102, Civil Procedure Code, taking away right of second appeal--Revision filed by party under misapprehension of such right converted into second appeal by High Court.-- Revision (civil).
PCRLJ 1988
Criminal Miscellaneous Applications Nos. 463 (Hyd.) 409 and 410 (Kar.) of 1987, decided on 31st January, 1987.

1988 P Cr

YAR MUHAMMAD and 12 others — Applicants Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Court: Karachi