Recklessness

Recklessness is consciously taking of an unjustifiable risk, whereas negligence is the inadvertently taking of an unjustifiable risk

If a person was aware of the risk and decided to take it, he was reckless and if he was unaware of the risk but ought to have been aware of it, he was negligent

Negligence and recklessness both, in a general sense, are same species

While rashness is acting in the hope that no mischievous consequences will ensue though aware of the likelihood of such consequences, negligence is acting without the awareness that harmful or mischievous consequences will follow

Reasonable foresight is the criterion to determine whether the act was rash or negligent.

Ss. 4, 6, 7 & 35 read with Scheds. I & II; Punjab Finance Act (XIV of 1973), S.8 read with Scheds. IV & V; Cut Fees (Punjab Amendment) Ordinance (XIV of 1981), S.2 further amending Art. 13 of Sched.II of Court Fees Act, 1870; Sindh Finance Act (IV of 1990), S.4 amending Ss.4 & 7 of Sched. I of Court Fees Act, 1870; Balochistan Finance (Amendment) Ordinance (XIII of 1981), Ss. 3 & 4

N.-W.F.P. Court Fees Act/Ordinance including N.-W.F.P. Court Fees (Abolition) (Amendment) Ordinance (XVII of 1980), and any other provision in the Central and Provincial statutes relating to charging of court-fees, which might not have been pointed out or referred to the Court were declared as repugnant to the Injunctions of Islam

Apprehension that abolition of court-fee on suits/appeals on ad valorem or market value would encourage litigant public to file frivolous and vexatious suits would not justify to desist Court from enforcement of Islamic Injunctions

Ways and means to keep in check the undesirable tendency suggested by the Court

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.203-D.