Home Maxims & Terms Criminal Prosecution meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Criminal Prosecution

Criminal Prosecution legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

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

2017 CLD 1 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
S. 20(4)Criminal prosecutionScope

No prohibition placed under S. 20(4) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, on setting into motion of criminal prosecution under general law and registration of cases under Penal Code, 1860.

2017 CLD 1 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
S. 20(4)Criminal prosecutionBanking Court, jurisdiction of

Proceedings under any other law are not prohibited under S. 20(4) of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001, it merely confers jurisdiction on Banking Court with regard to offences mentioned in Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001.

1975 PLD 210 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Delay per se no ground for holding that no offence committed. `

1970 PLD 726 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Criminal Prosecution Specious and spiteful criminal prosecutionDeprecatedArbitrary or mala fide attitude or excess zeal on part of police

Not to interfere with proper rights or liberties of citizens.

1970 PLD 289 DHAKA-HIGH-COURT Judicial Precedent
Criminal Prosecution

Jurisdiction - Special tribunal created for trial of offence-That tribunal alone competent to try such offence.

1968 PCRLJ 471 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent

Criminal Prosecution Criminal prosecution-Delay-View that time is of essence for competency of a criminal prosecution-No longer accepted as of universal application-Distinction to be drawn between delay in investigation and delay during trial of case.

1963 PLD 32 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent
Criminal ProsecutionEstoppel-Rule does not apply

Proceedings dropped by Government on accused's fuelling certain conditions-Government not precluded from re-starting prosecution.

1961 PLD 875 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE Judicial Precedent

Criminal Prosecution Criminal prosecution-Company or corporation whether and when can 6e prosecuted criminally-Electricity Act (IX of 1910), S. 42.

1953 PLD 35 FEDERAL-COURT-OF-PAKISTAN Judicial Precedent

Parties -Crown and accused -Whether "Society" to be considered as a "third party" -Crown, embodiment of State. Parties -Crown and accused -Whether "Society" to be considered as a "third party" -Crown, embodiment of State.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Criminal Prosecution", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/2504

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Criminal Prosecution"

PTD 1999
Crl. W. J. C. No.265 of 1992, decided on 16th December, 1996

1999PTD 1917

Dr. A. A. HAI Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX and another

Court: Patna High Court (India)
PLC(CS) 2019
C.Ps. Nos. D-3460, D-3366 of 2011, D-1053, D-1524, D-1657, D-3644 of 2013 and D-1268 of 2016, decided on 4th September, 2018.

2019 P L C (C

ABDUL HALEEM SIDDIQUI and others Versus FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through the Law Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Pakistan Secretariat, Islamabad and others

Court: Sindh High Court
PTD 2014
Writ Petition No.5047 of 2012, decided on 19th September, 2013.

2014 P T D 1807

TAJ INTERNATIONAL (PVT.) LTD. and others Versus FEDERAL BOARD OF REVENUE and others

Court: Lahore High Court
PTD 1969
Civil Reference No. 17 of 1966, decided on 17th January 1969.

1969 P T D 300

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX, KARACHI Versus MESSRS DALMIA CEMENT LTD., KARACHI

Court: Karachi (Pakistan)
PLD 1969
Civil Reference No. 17 of 1966, decided on 17th January 1969.

P L D 1969 Karachi 261

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME‑TAX, KARACHI Applicant Versus MESSRS DALMIA CEMENT LTD., KARACHI Respondent

Court:
PLC(CS) 2009
Constitutional Petitions Nos.D-2024, D-128, D-2329, D-2000, D-2106 and D-2126 of 2008, decided on 6th March, 2009.

2009 P L C (C

Syed MUNAWAR SULTAN and 6 others Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH through Chief Secretary and 2 others

Court: Karachi High Court
PLD 1967
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3546 of 1966, decided on 8th March 1967.

P L D 1967 Lahore 1126

BASHIR AHMAD-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent

Court: (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 403 & 561-A Principle of double jeopardy not attracted to criminal prosecution of accused under S. 161, Penal Code (XLV of 1860) and S. 5(2) Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), who has already been punished departmentally and deprived of increments for two years cumulatively-No case for quashing proceedings under S. 561-A S. A. Venkataraman v. Union of India and another A I R 1954 S C 375; Maqbool Husain v. State of Bombay A I R 1953 S C 325 and A. M. S. Muhammad Qasim v. Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Madurai A I R 1962 Mad. 85 ref .
PCRLJ 2010
2009-October-29

2010 P Cr

ABDUL KARIM — Applicant Versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION JAMSHORO and another — Respondents

Court: Karachi
MLD 1999
3rd November 1998

1999 M L D 2243

MAHABAT KHAN and 5 others — Petitioners Versus SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE and 5 others — Respondents

Court: Lahore
PLC(CS) 2018
Criminal Appeals Nos. 430 to 432, 442, 446, 447 and 495 of 2017, decided on 17th January, 2018.

2018 P L C (C

STATE through Prosecutor-General, Punjab Versus JAHANGIR AKHTAR and others

Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan