Home Maxims & Terms Badgering meaning in Urdu
Word Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Badgering

Badgering legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

1950 PLD 1 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

"badgering" and severe cross-examination-Not easy to make demarcation between the two.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Badgering", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/15136

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Badgering"

PLD 1950
Criminal Original No. 14 of 1949. Application decided on 15th July, 1949.

P

Court:
MLD 2004
Criminal Miscellaneous No.2464‑B of 2003, decided on 26th September, 2003.

2004 M L D 424

SALEEM and another‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent

Court: Lahore
PCRLJ 2015
2014-April-2

2015 P Cr

Mst. RIFFAT PARVEEN — Petitioner Versus REGIONAL DIRECTOR ANTI-CORRUPTION ESTABLISHMENT MULTAN REGION, MULTAN and 7 others — Respondents

Court: Lahore
PLD 1988
Writ Petition No.1129 of 1967, decided on 24th April, 1988.

P L D 1988 Lahore 489

HASSAN ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus THE COLLECTOR, CENTRAL EXCISE & LAND CUSTOMS LAHORE and another‑‑Respondents

Court: ‑‑‑Ss.167(81) & 17 7‑A‑‑ Ingredients of offence under S.167(81)‑‑Gold was not seized by the Customs but it was seized by the Police, who found that no case of smuggling was made out, but delivered the gold to the Customs authorities to wash their hands of the case and to permit the Customs to seize the same, if they considered any, offence was made out‑‑Burden of proof not shifted on accused in circumstances.‑‑ Burden of proof‑.
PLD 1972
Criminal Appeal No. 126 of 1971, decided on 2nd November 1971.

P L D 1972 Peshawar 22

FARHATULLAH KHAN‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent

Court:
PLD 1983
Criminal Appeals Nos. K-3 .and K-4 of 1982, decided on 26th January, 1"3.

P L D 1983 Supreme Court 286

STATE-Appellant Versus HABIBUR RAHMAN AHD OTHERS-Respondents

Court: - S. 3 read with Penal Code :(XLV of -1860), S. 302 and Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 161-Murder-Criminal trial-Evidence-Words "evidence" and "proved" in S. 3 of Evidence Act-Definitions-Consideration of all "matters" carries wider connotation than "evidence"-Circumstantial deduction reaching "probability", a mental cognition which leads to "supposition" regarding existence of a fact "probability" not lower than "likelihood" which is higher than a mere possibility, a surmise or a conjecture-Courts applying some artificial rules of evidence must attach due and purposeful importance to aspect of statutory mandate--Defence complaining about authenticity of police statements recorded under S. 161, Cr.- P. C. and statement of one of prosecution witnesses stated to be missing-Elaborate enquiry not considered necessary regarding such statements-Court can in such case, give a reasoned finding about which set of copies was "proved" on probabilities" in pursuance of definition. of word "proved" in S. 3 of Evidence Act.-Words and phrases.
PLD 2021
2020-November-4

P L D 2021 Supreme Court 671

SAEEDA SULTAN — Petitioner Versus LIAQAT ALI ORAKZAI and others — Respondents

Court: High Court
PLD 1970
Civil Miscellaneous No. 25/1, of 1967 in

P L D 1970 Lahore 235

THE UNITED BANK LTD.‑Petitioner Versus MESSRS PAK WHEAT PRODUCTS LTD.‑Respondent

Court:
CLC 2008
2007-December-31

2008 C L C 697

IMRAN AHMED KHAN — Petitioner Versus PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Defence and another — Respondents

Court: Karachi
PLC(CS) 2008
C P. No.D-1766 of 2006, decided on 31st December, 2007.

2008 P L C (C

IMRAN AHMED KHAN Versus PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Defence and another

Court: Karachi High Court