Nudity
Nudity legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Meaning.
"Nudity", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/12549
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Nudity"
2021 S C M R 1815
FAKHAR ZAMAN — Petitioner Versus The STATE through D.A.G. and another — Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of PakistanP L D 1960 (W
YAQUB BEG‑Convict‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---S. 292‑"Obscenity"‑Question not to be determined by opinion of an artist but rather by reaction of a normal man and by prevailing normal standards and conditions of society‑Opinions of majority of witnesses, not a true test‑Duty of Court to decide‑Inhibitions and taboos‑Wholesome effect on society: The Queen v. Hicklin 1868 L R 3 Q B 360 ; Emperor v. Thakar Datt 18 Cr. L J 126 ; Sreeram Saksena v. Emperor A I R 1940 Cal. 290; Sakunta Haider v. The State A I R 1952 Cal. 214; M. Ramamurthy v. State of Mysore A I R 1954 Mys. 164: R. V. Martin Secker Warburg, Ltd. All E. R. Vol. II 683 and Crown v. Saadat Hassan Minto P L D 1952 Lah. 284 ref.P L D 2022 Supreme Court (AJ&K) 17
AAMIR FAROOQ — Appellant Versus NAIMA FAROOQ — Respondent
Court: High CourtP L D 2000 Lahore 449
THE STATE‑‑‑Petitioner Versus ABDUL MALIK alias MALKOO‑‑‑Respondent
Court:P L D 1952 Lahore 384
CROWN‑Appellant Versus SAADAT HASSAN MINTO and two others Accused‑Respondents
Court: High CourtP L D 1986 Karachi 121
MURTAZA ALI KHAN‑Appellant Versus THE STATE ‑Respondent
Court: ‑‑ S. 302 ‑ No eye‑witness of occurrence‑TWO of witnesses who were attracted immediately on commotion were examined as prosecution witnesses‑Said witnesses found to be not only independent witnesses but they were most natural witnesses whose presence at relevant time and place could not be doubted‑Both of said witnesses fully supporting prosecuting case Ocular testimony getting support from recovery of crime weapon from possession of accused- Report of ballistic expert found to be positive Prosecution case getting further support from statement of accused under section 342, CrPC wherein he admitted to have murdered deceased Plea of sudden and grave provocation raised by accused in his statement recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C disbelieved Conviction maintained witness1975 P Cr
ABDUL SATTAR‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑Opponent
Court: KarachiP L D 1974 Lahore 476
NAZIR AHMAD‑Petitioner Versus LATIF HUSSAIN AND 3 OTHERS‑Respondents
Court:1980 P Cr
ALI NAWAZ‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: KarachiP L D 1994 Karachi 60
ASIF IQBAL‑‑‑Petitioner Versus KARACHI METROPOLITAN CORPORATION and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents
Court: ‑‑‑‑Art. 24‑‑‑Protection of property rights‑‑‑Right to acquire, hold and dispose of property is a fundamental right guaranteed under Art. 24 of the Constitution‑‑‑Petitioner having acquired a right in plot in question through auction became owner of leasehold rights‑‑‑Petitioner having deposited the entire bid money possession of plot was delivered to him in part performance of agreement‑‑‑In spite of the fact that lease deed had not been executed, petitioner had acquired a right in property‑‑‑Petitioner's such property was taken away by notice (in question) without any show‑cause notice or without providing him any opportunity of being heard and without any proceeding in law‑‑‑Petitioner had made construction of plot in question after obtaining sanction of building plan from appropriate Authority by spending huge amount‑‑‑Authorities having sold said plot to petitioner in public auction to construct the building were precluded by doctrine of promissory estoppel from resuming the plot in question.‑‑Estoppel.