Deceleration of Public Holiday on the Occasion of Youm-e-Takbeer In modification of Cabinet Division's circular No. 10-02/2023-Min-II dated 20th December, 2023 regarding public and optional holidays for the year 2024, the Prime Minister has been pleased to declare 28th May 2024 (Youm-e-Takbeer) as a public holiday throughout the country
The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) decided to give three salaries as bonus to its officers and employees.
According to letters dispatched to the provincial election commissioners, the ECP has informed that employees and officers will get three basic salaries as bonus.
Those who are facing departmental inquiries and moved to services tribunals or judiciary will not be eligible for the bonus, the ECP letter stated.
The ECP has already given two salary bonuses to its employees in March after conducting the general elections in February.
As per rules of the finance ministry, no institution is allowed to give five bonuses to its staff in a single fiscal year.
Following the general elections on February 8, CEC Sikandar Sultan Raja lauded the services of the body’s staff, law enforcement agencies and the local administration on the peaceful conduct of the polls that ensured smooth transfer of powers from the caretakers to the elected government.
Witness mentioned in FIR but whose statement is not recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C.---Whether such witness could be examined under section 256-F or section 540, Cr.P.C. and his evidence relied upon---Held, that perusal of section 265-F, Cr.P.C. shows that nowhere in the said section it is mentioned that only those witnesses could be examined whose statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. have been recorded---Under section 265-F, Cr.P.C. the Trial Court is not bound to record the statements of only those witnesses who have been listed in the calendar of witnesses---Furthermore there is no bar that a witness, whose statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. had not been recorded at the time of investigation, cannot be allowed to be examined under section 540, Cr.P.C.---When a witness is examined in Court, whose statement has not been recorded at the time of investigation under section 161, Cr.P.C., the evidentiary value to be attached to the evidence of such witness has to be looked into and if it is found that prejudice has been caused to the accused then the evidence of such witness may or may not be acted upon.
To arrive at a just conclusion, the courts can call any person likely to be acquainted with the facts of the case after ascertaining it from the Public Prosecutor or the complainant, subject to general provisions that summoning of any such witness does not cause delay or defeat the ends of justice. Section 265-F(2) of Cr.P.C empowers the Courts to summon a person, after having been ascertained from the Public Prosecutor or the complainant, who is likely to be acquainted with the facts of the case, to be able to give evidence for the prosecution. Section 265-F(7), Cr.P.C grants even to the accused a right to apply for summoning any witness and production of documents. The very purpose of section 265-F, Cr.P.C is to ensure the concept of a fair trial and to achieve this purpose equal opportunity has been given to both the accused and the prosecution for summoning the evidence. It is nowhere mentioned in this section that only those witnesses could be examined whose statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. have been recorded. Under this provision of law i.e. section 265-F, Cr.P.C the Trial Court is not bound to record the statements of only those witnesses who have been listed in the calendar of witnesses.
On the other hand, section 540, Cr.P.C. empowers the Trial Court to summon a material witness even if his name did not appear in the column of witnesses, provided his evidence is deemed essential for the just and proper decision of the case. Section 540 is divisible in two parts. In the first part, discretion is given to the Court and enables it at any stage of an inquiry, trial or other proceedings under the Code, (a) to summon anyone as a witness, or (b) to examine any person present in the Court, or (c) to recall and re-examine any person whose evidence had already been recorded. On the other hand, the second part appears to be mandatory and requires the Court to take any of the steps mentioned above if the new evidence appears to be essential to the just decision of the case. The object of the provision, as a whole, is to do justice not only from the point of view of the accused and the prosecution but also justice from the point of view of the society. The Court examines evidence under this section neither to help the prosecution nor to help the accused. It is done neither to fill up any gaps in the prosecution evidence nor to give it any unfair advantage against the accused. Fundamental thing to be seen is whether the Court considers this evidence necessary in the facts and circumstances of the particular case before it. If this results in only "filling of lacuna" that is purely a subsidiary factor and cannot be taken into consideration. There is no bar that a witness, whose statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. had not been recorded at the time of investigation, cannot be allowed to be examined under section 540, Cr.P.C. When a witness is examined in Court, whose statement has not been recorded at the time of investigation under section 161, Cr.P.C., the evidentiary value to be attached to the evidence of such witness has to be looked into and if it is found that prejudice has been caused to the accused then the evidence of such witness may or may not be acted upon.
----Concept of 'rigor mortis' and factors affecting the same explained.
The phrase rigor mortis is latin with rigor meaning stiffness and mortis meaning death. Rigor mortis is a temporary condition. Depending on body temperature and other conditions, rigor mortis lasts proximately for 72 hours. The phenomenon is caused by the skeletal muscles partially contracting. The muscles are unable to relax, so the joints become fixed in place. Factors that affect rigor mortis include (i) temperature/weather, (ii) physical exertion, (iii) age, (iv) body fat, (v) any illness the person had at the time of death, (vi) sun exposure, (vii) gender, (viii) body structure, (ix) genetics, (x) tribe and (xi) inhabitation.
Appellant Sajid Mehmood along with three co-accused was tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Jhelum in terms of the case registered vide FIR No. 13 dated 16.01.2014 under sections 302/34, P.P.C. at Police Station Civil Line, District Jhelum, for committing murder of Azeem Ahmed, brother of the complainant. The learned Trial Court vide its judgment dated 23.06.2015 while acquitting the co-accused, convicted appellant Sajid Mehmood under section 302(b), P.P.C. and sentenced him to death. He was also directed to pay compensation amounting to Rs.500,000/- to the legal heirs of the deceased. In case of non-payment of the compensation, the same was ordered to be recovered as arrears of land revenue and the appellant was to suffer SI for six months. In appeal the learned High Court while maintaining the conviction of the appellant under section 302(b), P.P.C., altered the sentence of death into imprisonment for life. The amount of compensation and the mode of recovery thereof was maintained. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was also extended to the appellant. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment, the appellant filed Jail Petition No. 160/2018 wherein leave was granted by this Court on 02.06.2020 and the present appeal has arisen out of the same.
2. The prosecution story as given in the impugned judgment reads as under:-
"2. The brief facts of the case as unfolded in the FIR, recorded on the statement of Jameel Hussain, complainant (PW-10) are that on 16.01.2014, he (complainant) along with his father Karamat Hussain, PW and his brother Zameer Ahmad was present outside the gate of his house for participating in Milad Sharif in the mosque, when at about 8.30 p.m. Azeem Ahmed, deceased (brother of complainant) came there on his white coloured cultus car bearing registration No. LW/9991 from city side. Azeem Ahmad (deceased) parked his car in front of his house and as soon as he alighted from his car, accused persons namely Sajid Mehmood alias Saja, Aurangzeb alias Ranga, Abdul Samad all armed with the pistol 30 bore respectively also arrived thereon white colour car being driven by Shahid alias Sando, the accused Aurangzeb alias Rangha raised a lalkara and consequently Sajid Mehmood alias Saja made a straight fire shot of his pistol targeting left thigh of Azeem Ahmad. On receipt of this pistol's fire Azeem Ahmad fell down on the ground and succumbed to his injuries on the spot and accused persons on their car vanished from the place of occurrence. The occurrence was witnessed by complainant, Zameer Hussain (PW-1) and Karamat Hussain (since given up).
The motive behind the occurrence was that on the previous night of the occurrence, the accused persons had got set on fire the Haveli of the complainant party and falsely involved Junaid and others in the occurrence; the respectable of the locality had patched up that matter between the complainant party and Junaid and others; due to this grudge, the accused committed the murder of complainant's brother. Hence, the crime report."
3. After completion of the investigation, report under section 173, Cr.P.C. was submitted before the Trial Court. The prosecution in order to prove its case produced 13 witnesses. In his statement recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. the appellant pleaded his innocence and refuted all the allegations levelled against him. However, he did not make his statement on oath under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. in disproof of allegations levelled against him. He also did not produce any evidence in his defence.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that it was an un-witnessed occurrence and the whole prosecution case is concocted one. Contends that even there are glaring contradictions and dishonest improvements in the statements of the eye-witnesses, which have escaped the notice of the learned courts below. Contends that the complainant was brother of the deceased, therefore, his testimony cannot be believed to sustain the conviction of the appellant. Contends that there is conflict between medical and ocular account. Contends that the postmortem examination was conducted after two hours of the occurrence and in such a short span of time, the rigor mortis could not develop as such contradicted time of occurrence. Contends that according to prosecution witnesses, the dead body of the deceased was brought to the hospital in car whereas according to Dr. Saeed Anwar (PW-7), the dead body was brought by Rescue 1122, which speaks volumes on the conduct of the prosecution witnesses. Contends that although Zameer Hussain (PW-11) was mentioned as witness in the FIR but the Police did not record his statement under section 161, Cr.P.C., therefore, the said witness could not be examined to corroborate the solitary evidence of other eye-witness i.e. the complainant.
5. On the other hand, learned Law Officer has defended the impugned judgment by contending that the judgment of the learned High Court is well reasoned, based on correct principles of law and has examined the evidence in its true perspective, therefore, the same does not call for any interference by this Court.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and have perused the evidence available on the record with their able assistance.
The ocular account in this case has been furnished by Ch. Jameel Hussain, complainant (PW-10) and Zameer Hussain (PW-11). These prosecution witnesses were subjected to lengthy cross-examination by the defence but nothing favourable to the appellant or adverse to the prosecution could be produced on record. Both these PWs remained consistent on each and every material point inasmuch as they made deposition exactly according to the circumstances happened in this case, therefore, it can safely be concluded that the ocular account furnished by the prosecution is reliable, straightforward and confidence inspiring. The medical evidence available on the record corroborates the ocular account so far as the nature, time and impact of the injury on the person of the deceased is concerned. So far as the argument of learned counsel for the appellant that the medical evidence contradicts the ocular version is concerned, we may observe that where ocular evidence is found trustworthy and confidence inspiring, the same is given preference over medical evidence. It is settled that casual discrepancies and conflicts appearing in medical evidence and the ocular version are quite possible for variety of reasons. During turmoil when live shots are being fired, witnesses in a momentary glance make only tentative assessment of points where such fire shots appeared to have landed and it becomes highly improbable to mention their location with exactitude. As far as the question that the complainant was brother of the deceased, therefore, his testimony cannot be believed to sustain conviction of the appellant is concerned, it is by now a well established principle of law that mere relationship of the prosecution witnesses with the deceased cannot be a ground to discard the testimony of such witnesses unless previous enmity or ill will is established on the record to falsely implicate the accused in the case. Both these PWs were inmates of the house, in front of which occurrence took place, therefore, their presence was natural and the same is fully established from the record. Learned counsel for the appellant could not point out any reason as to why the complainant has falsely involved the appellant in the present case and let off the real culprit, who has committed murder of his real brother. Substitution in such like cases is a rare phenomenon. The complainant would not prefer to spare the real culprit who murdered his brother and falsely involve the appellant without any rhyme and reason. During the course of proceedings, the learned counsel contended that there are material discrepancies and contradictions in the statements of the eye-witnesses but on our specific query he could not point out any major contradiction, which could shatter the case of the prosecution. While appreciating the evidence, the court must not attach undue importance to minor discrepancies and such minor discrepancies which do not shake the salient features of the prosecution case should be ignored. The accused cannot claim premium of such minor discrepancies. If importance be given to such insignificant inconsistencies then there would hardly be any conviction.
7. It was one of the arguments of learned counsel for the appellant that although Zameer Hussain (PW-11) was mentioned as witness in the FIR but his statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. was not recorded, therefore, his testimony cannot be relied upon to sustain conviction of the appellant. However, we do not tend to agree with the learned counsel. To arrive at a just conclusion, the courts can call any person likely to be acquainted with the facts of the case after ascertaining it from the Public Prosecutor or the complainant, subject to general provisions that summoning of any such witness does not cause delay or defeat the ends of justice. Section 265-F(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure empowers the Courts to summon a person, after having been ascertained from the Public Prosecutor or the complainant, who is likely to be acquainted with the facts of the case and to be able to give evidence for the prosecution. Section 265-F(7) grants even to the accused a right to apply for summoning any witness and production of documents. The very purpose of section 265-F is to ensure the concept of a fair trial and to achieve this purpose equal opportunity has been given to both the accused and the prosecution for summoning the evidence. There is nowhere mentioned in this Section that only those witnesses could be examined whose statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. have been recorded. Under this provision of law i.e. section 265-F the Trial Court is not bound to record the statements of only those witnesses who have been listed in the calendar of witnesses. On the other hand, section 540, Cr.P.C. empowers the Trial Court to summon a material witness even if his name did not appear in the column of witnesses provided his evidence is deemed essential for the just and proper decision of the case. In the present case, although the statement of Zameer Hussain (PW-11) under section 161, Cr.P.C. could not be recorded by the Police yet the fact remains that he was named as an eye-witness in the very FIR and was fully acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the case. It would be advantageous to reproduce section 540, Cr.P.C., which is as follows:-
"540. Power to summon material witness, or examine persons present. Any Court may, at any stage of any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code, summon any person as a witness, or examine any person in attendance, though not summoned as a witness, or recall and re-examine any person already examined; and the Court shall summon and examine or recall and re-examine any such person if his evidence appears to it to be essential to the just decision of the case".
8. This section is divisible in two parts. In the first part, discretion is given to the Court and enables it at any stage of an inquiry, trial or other proceedings under the Code, (a) to summon anyone as a witness, or (b) to examine any person present in the Court, or (c) to recall and re-examine any person whose evidence had already been recorded. On the other hand, the second part appears to be mandatory and requires the Court to take any of the steps mentioned above if the new evidence appears to it essential to the just decision of the case. The object of the provision, as a whole, is to do justice not only from the point of view of the accused and the prosecution but also justice from the point of view of the society. The Court examines evidence under this section neither to help the prosecution nor to help the accused. It is done neither to fill up any gaps in the prosecution evidence nor to give it any unfair advantage against the accused. Fundamental thing to be seen is whether the Court considers this evidence necessary in the facts and circumstances of the particular case before it. If this results in only "filling of lacuna" that is purely a subsidiary factor and cannot be taken into consideration. There is no bar that a witness, whose statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. had not been recorded at the time of investigation, cannot be allowed to examine under section 540, Cr.P.C. When a witness examined in Court, whose statement has not been recorded at the time of investigation under section 161, Cr.P.C., the evidentiary value to be attached to the evidence of such witness has to be looked into and if it is found that prejudice has been caused to the accused then the evidence of such witness may or may not be acted upon. Therefore, the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant is misconceived.
9. In Abid Ali v. The State (2011 SCMR 208), this Court has held that to believe or disbelieve a witness, all depends upon intrinsic value of the statement made by him. There cannot be universal principle that in every case, interested witnesses should be disbelieved or disinterested witnesses be believed. It all depends upon the rule of prudence and reasonableness to hold that a particular witness was present on scene of crime and that he is making true statement. Person who is reported otherwise to be very honest, aboveboard and very respectable in society, if gives a statement which is illogical and unbelievable, no prudent man despite his nobility would accept such statement. As a rule of criminal jurisprudence, prosecution evidence is not tested on the basis of quantity but quality of evidence. It is not that who is giving evidence and making statement. What is relevant is what statement has been given and it is not the person but the statement of that person which is to be seen and adjudged. In Niaz-ud-Din v. The State (2011 SCMR 725), it was held that conviction in a murder case can be based on the testimony of a single witness, if court is satisfied that he is reliable and it is the quality of evidence and not the quantity which matters. The same was the view of this Court in Asim v. The State (2005 SCMR 417), Lal Khan v. The State (2006 SCMR 1846) and Muhammad Sadiq v. The State (2022 SCMR 690). In this view of the matter, even if the testimony of Zameer Hussain is discarded, the evidence of complainant is sufficient to sustain conviction of the appellant.
10. So far as recovery of crime weapon is concerned, after his arrest on 26.01.2014, the appellant got recovered .30 bore pistol and the same was sent to Forensic Science Laboratory on 04.02.2012. The one crime empty had already been
Art 106 of the Police Order 2002 covers the conduct of judicial inquiry with a request to Chief Justice of the High Court under intimation to the Government to appoint a Judge not below the District and Sessions Judge for said purpose.
If the Provincial Police Complaints Authority receives from the District Public Safety Commission or Head of District Police any report of death, rape or serious injury to any person in police custody it would take steps to preserve evidence relating to such incident and request the Chief Justice of the High Court under intimation to the Government to appoint a Judge not below the District and Sessions Judge for a judicial enquiry.
Clauses (c) & (d) of Article 155(1) of Police Order 2002 are relevant to the subject under discussion because for willful breach or neglect of any provision of law or of any rule or regulation or any order which the police is bound to observe or obey or guilty of any violation of duty, FIR can be registered as being cognizable offences but under Article 155(2) of the Police Order, it still needs a sanction for prosecution in the form of report in writing by an officer authorized in this behalf under the rules. Article 2 (xxiii) of Police Order, 2002 says, ‘rules’ means rules made under this Order and as per Article 186 of Police Order, 2002 “Existing police deemed to be constituted under this Order” therefore, Police Rules,1934 shall also be deemed applicable until the new rules are framed. As per Police Rules, 1934, Deputy Inspector General of Police is the authorized officer for granting sanction for prosecution.
It is held that for initiation of departmental action against any rank of police officer/official, different authorities are authorized in the police hierarchy but for judicial prosecution respective Deputy Inspector General of Police is the authorized officer. Therefore, despite registration of FIR, sanction of prosecution shall further determine the continuation of proceedings against the accused police officer/official. If such sanction is not available then court cannot proceed further. This situation has impliedly been met under section 230 of Cr.P.C.
If required sanction is not given then court can stay the proceeding in trial of such offence or Prosecutor can drop the prosecution of such offence under section 10(3)(f) of the Punjab Criminal Prosecution Service (Constitution, Functions and Powers) Act, 2006.
Types of offences if committed under Article 156 of the Police Order, 2002, do not require any sanction of authorized officer and being punishable up to five years would be cognizable as per second schedule of Cr.P.C. under segment “offences against other laws”, therefore after registration of FIR it shall be prosecuted through a normal course of trial. However, offence under Article 157 being punishable up to one year shall be non-cognizable as per above scheme; thus, for such offence action can be taken as per Section 155 of Cr.P.C. meant for investigation into non-cognizable offences but if some cognizable offences are also attracted in the series of act, then it shall also be investigated with cognizable offences without the permission of a magistrate.
If a complaint of neglect, failure or excess committed by any police officer/official is received by the ex-officio Justice of the Peace, he can simply pass it to District Police Officer concerned for placing it before the Police Complaints Authority who is authorized to channelize it as per Article 36 of the Police Order, 2002, or ex-officio justice of the peace can direct the aggrieved person to approach the Police Complaints Authority by filing an application and further course of action shall be taken care of by the said authority under the law. If both the directions are not met, ex-officio justice of the Peace can proceed as per law suggested above.
Establishment of Provincial Police Complaints Authority is essential for action on derelictions of police.
نیم کا درخت 55C گرمی 10C سردی برداشت کرنے کی طاقت رکھتا ہے ۔ ایک بارہ فٹ کا درخت 3 ایئر کنڈیشنر کے برابر ٹھنڈک پیدا کرتا ہیں۔ درخت زندگی ہیں درخت ایک قیمتی سرمایہ ہیں نیم کے اس پودے کی قیمت 50 سے 100 روپے ھوگی . ۔۔
درخت لگائیں. زندگیاں بچائیں ۔۔۔🥀
نیم کا استعمال برصغیر پاک وہند میں صدیوں سے چلا آ رہا ہے، بدقسمتی سے جدید دور میں ہماری نئی نسل قدرتی اجزاء سے ناواقف ہوتے جارہے ہیں ،جبکہ اسکی افادیت بہت زیادہ ہے اس کے پتے اور چھال ہر قسم کی جلدی امراض میں سب سے زیادہ بہتر ہیں
کوشش کریں اپنے گھر ، رقبہ ، سڑک کنارے جہاں جہاں ممکن ہو اسکا پودا ضرور لگائیں ۔۔۔
ویسے بھی درخت لگانا صدقہ جاریہ ھے۔۔
There are reports of possible internet outages and disruptions starting from tomorrow (May 16, 2024), as The Supreme Court of Pakistan mandated that the federal and Punjab governments provide a video-link setup for imprisoned PTI founder Imran Khan, enabling him to participate and present his case in the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) amendment lawsuit.
“The PTI founder is allowed to present his case through video link at the next hearing if he chooses to,” declared Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Qazi Faez Isa, emphasizing the need for video link facilities.
This directive was issued during the session on the federal government’s intra-court appeal against the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision, which invalidated several NAB amendments. Khan expressed his intention to personally argue his case.
ڈرائیونگ لائسنس کے ایک ٹیسٹ کے دورانیہ میں ترمیم کر دی گئی ہے پہلے چھ ہفتے بعد دوبارہ ٹیسٹ ہوتا تھا اب پندرہ یوم بعد کر دیا گیا
Refer to the Notification No. HP-I/15-22/2024 dated 28.02.2024 issued by Home Department, Govt of the Punjab. The notification stipulates a significant amendment to the Punjab Motor Vehicle Rules, 1969, specifically Rule 9-3.
2. Pursuant to the aforementioned notification, the period prescribed in Rule 9-3 for re-appearance in the E-sign/Road test following a candidate's failure has been amended. The word in rule 9-3, for the words "six weeks", the words "fifteen days" shall be substituted.
3. In light of this amendment, it is imperative that all candidates who have failed the E-sign/Road test are now eligible to re-take the test after a period of fifteen days. Additionally, the Driving License Issuance Management System (DLIMS) has been updated to reflect these modifications.
4. Therefore, all CTOs and DTOs are directed to ensure the implementation of this revised rule within their respective districts in full letter and spirit to facilitate the public.
5. This may be treated as Most Urgent.
شاہی توپ کی تاریخ
ہم سلطنت عثمانیہ کی طرف سے قسطنطنیہ (جدید استنبول) کی فتح کا ذکر کر رہے ہیں، جس کی قیادت محمود دوم (جسے فاتح محمود بھی کہا جاتا ہے) نے کیا تھا۔ سلطنت عثمانیہ نے شہر کی دیواروں کو توڑنے کے لیے "عظیم ترک بمبار" یا "Basilic" نامی ایک بڑی توپ کا استعمال کیا۔
فتح 53 دن کے محاصرے کے بعد 29 مئی 1453 کو ہوئی۔ عظیم ترک بمبارڈ ایک بہت بڑی توپ تھی، جو مبینہ طور پر 27 فٹ سے زیادہ لمبی اور 2 فٹ سے زیادہ قطر کے ساتھ تھی، جو 1,200 پاؤنڈ تک وزنی پتھر کے پروجیکٹائل کو فائر کرنے کے قابل تھی۔
محمود دوم کی قسطنطنیہ کی فتح نے بازنطینی سلطنت کے خاتمے اور مشرقی یورپ میں سلطنت عثمانیہ کی توسیع کا آغاز کیا۔
یہی شاہی توپ سیریز میں اربن اُستاد بنا رہے ہیں
.
ہم ساری قوم خود بزدل- ڈرپوک اور کرپٹ ہیں۔ ہمیں کیا پتہ کہ حق کیسے لیتے ہیں۔ ہاں کشمیریوں نے ایک ہفتے میں بتا دیا کہ حق کیسے لیتے ہیں۔ ہم کو صرف 9 مئی کے پیچھے لگا کر بجلی گیس و دیگر اشیاء خوردونوش مہنگی کر دی۔ ہم
احتجاج تک نہیں کر سکتے۔۔۔ خُدارا اب تو جاگ جائیں 🙏
یہ انفارمیشن ہر پاکستانی شہری کے لیے جاننا ضروری ہے۔
*دفعہ 295-A* کسی مذہب کی توھین کرنا
*دفعہ 295-B* قرآن پاک کی غلط تشریح کرنا
*دفعہ 295-C* توھین رسالت
*دفعہ 298-A* توھین صحابہ
*دفعہ 307* = قتل کی کوشش کی
*دفعہ 302* = قتل کی سزا
*دفعہ 376* = عصمت دری
*دفعہ 395* = ڈکیتی
*دفعہ 377* = غیر فطری حرکتیں
*دفعہ 396* = ڈکیتی کے دوران قتل
*دفعہ 120* = سازش
*سیکشن 365* = اغوا
*دفعہ 201* = ثبوت کا خاتمہ
*دفعہ 34* = سامان کا ارادہ
*دفعہ 412* = خوشی منانا
*دفعہ 378* = چوری
*دفعہ 141* = غیر قانونی جمع
*دفعہ 191* = غلط ھدف بندی
*دفعہ 300* = قتل
*دفعہ 309* = خودکش کوشش
*دفعہ 310* = دھوکہ دہی
*دفعہ 312* = اسقاط حمل
*دفعہ 351* = حملہ کرنا
*دفعہ 354* = خواتین کی شرمندگی
*دفعہ 362* = اغوا
*دفعہ 320* = بغیر لائسنس یا جعلی لائیسنس کے ساتھ ایکسڈنٹ میں کسی کی موت واقع ہونا(ناقابلِ ضمانت)
*دفعہ322* = ڈرائیونگ لائسنس کے ساتھ ایکسیڈنٹ میں کسی کی موت واقع ہونا (قابلِ ضمانت)
*دفعہ 415* = چال
*دفعہ 445* = گھریلو امتیاز
*دفعہ 494* = شریک حیات کی زندگی میں دوبارہ شادی کرنا
*دفعہ 499* = ہتک عزت
*دفعہ 511* = جرم ثابت ہونے پر جرم ثابت ہونے پر عمر قید کی سزا۔
4
ہمارے ملک میں، قانون کے کچھ ایسے ہی حقائق موجود ہیں، جس کی وجہ سے ہم واقف ہی نہیں ہیں، ہم اپنے حقوق کا شکار رہتے ہیں۔
تو آئیے اس طرح کچھ کرتے ہیں
پانچ دلچسپ حقائق آپ کو معلومات فراہم کرتے ہیں،
جو زندگی میں کبھی بھی کارآمد ثابت ہوسکتی ہے۔
*(1) شام کو خواتین کو گرفتار نہیں کیا جاسکتا* -
ضابطہ فوجداری کے تحت، دفعہ 46، شام 6 بجے کے بعد اور صبح 6 بجے سے قبل، پولیس کسی بھی خاتون کو گرفتار نہیں کرسکتی، چاہے اس سے کتنا بھی سنگین جرم ہو۔ اگر پولیس ایسا کرتی ہوئی پائی جاتی ہے تو گرفتار پولیس افسر کے خلاف شکایت (مقدمہ) درج کیا جاسکتا ہے۔ اس سے اس پولیس افسر کی نوکری خطرے میں پڑسکتی ہے۔
(2.) سلنڈر پھٹنے سے جان و مال کے نقصان پر 40 لاکھ روپے تک کا انشورینس کا دعوی کیا جاسکتا ہے۔
عوامی ذمہ داری کی پالیسی کے تحت، اگر کسی وجہ سے آپ کے گھر میں سلنڈر ٹوٹ جاتا ہے اور آپ کو جان و مال کے نقصان کا سامنا کرنا پڑتا ہے ، تو آپ فوری طور پر گیس کمپنی سے انشورنس کور کا دعوی کرسکتے ہیں۔ آپ کو بتادیں کہ گیس کمپنی سے 40 لاکھ روپے تک کی انشورنس دعویٰ کیا جاسکتا ہے۔ اگر کمپنی آپ کے دعوے کو انکار کرتی ہے یا ملتوی کرتی ہے تو پھر اس کی شکایت کی جاسکتی ہے۔ اگر جرم ثابت ہوتا ہے تو ، گیس کمپنی کا لائسنس منسوخ کیا جاسکتا ہے۔
(3) کوئی بھی ہوٹل چاہے وہ 5 ستارے ہو… آپ مفت میں پانی پی سکتے ہیں اور واش روم استعمال کرسکتے ہیں -
سیریز ایکٹ، 1887 کے مطابق، آپ ملک کے کسی بھی ہوٹل میں جاکر پانی مانگ سکتے ہیں اور اسے پی سکتے ہیں اور اس ہوٹل کے واش روم کا استعمال بھی کرسکتے ہیں۔اگر ہوٹل چھوٹا ہے یا 5 ستارے، وہ آپ کو روک نہیں سکتے ہیں۔ اگر ہوٹل کا مالک یا کوئی ملازم آپ کو پانی پینے یا واش روم کے استعمال سے روکتا ہے تو آپ ان پر کارروائی کرسکتے ہیں۔ آپ کی شکایت کے سبب اس ہوٹل کا لائسنس منسوخ ہوسکتا ہے۔
(4) حاملہ خواتین کو برطرف نہیں کیا جاسکتا
زچگی بینیفٹ ایکٹ 1961 کے مطابق، حاملہ خواتین کو اچانک ملازمت سے نہیں ہٹایا جاسکتا۔ حمل کے دوران مالک کو تین ماہ کا نوٹس اور اخراجات کا کچھ حصہ دینا ہوگا۔ اگر وہ ایسا نہیں کرتا ہے تو پھر اس کے خلاف سرکاری ملازمت تنظیم میں شکایت درج کی جاسکتی ہے۔ یہ شکایت کمپنی بند ہونے کا سبب بن سکتی ہے یا کمپنی کو جرمانہ ادا کرنا پڑ سکتا ہے۔
(5) پولیس افسر آپ کی شکایت لکھنے سے انکار نہیں کرسکتا
پی پی سی کے سیکشن 166 اے کے مطابق، کوئی بھی پولیس افسر آپ کی شکایات درج کرنے سے انکار نہیں کرسکتا ہے۔اگر وہ ایسا کرتا ہے تو پھر اس کے خلاف سینئر پولیس آفس میں شکایت درج کی جاسکتی ہے۔اگر پولیس افسر قصوروار ثابت ہوتا ہے تو، اسے کم سے کم (6)ماہ سے 1 سال قید ہوسکتی ہے یا پھر اسے اپنی ملازمت سے ہاتھ دھونے پڑ سکتے ہیں۔
یہ دلچسپ حقائق ہیں، جو ہمارے ملک کے قانون کے تحت آتے ہیں، لیکن ہم ان سے لاعلم ہیں۔
یہ پیغام صرف اپنے پاس نہ رکھیں بلکہ جہاں تک ممکن ہو آگے پہنچائ
بنوں بیف پلاؤ فیصل آباد، جڑانوالہ، قصور، للیانی، کاہنہ، لاھور، راجا رام شجاع آباد اور جلال پور پیر والا روزانہ کی بنیاد پر پانچ سے چھ من وزنی گدھے کا گوشت، حرام جانوروں کا گوشت، بدبودار اور مضر صحت گوشت سپلائی کیا جاتا تھا،
رکشہ پر لوڈ کر کے سپلائی کرنے والوں نے اعتراف کر لیا،
اور کھاؤ مزے سے بنوں بیف پلاؤ، کٹا پلاؤ، درجہ ذیل ایف آئی آر بغور ملاحظہ فرمائیں شکریہ.
🇯🇵 Japan will always be way ahead of the rest of the world in terms of education.
🎨 This neighbor decided to paint their house and the painters put up some mesh to protect the other houses from splashes and not uncomfortable during the job.
🚗 In addition, neighbors who were not going to remove their cars while the company was working, they were covered with a tarpaulin so they wouldn't damage them at all... Empathy, education and respect are values I admire in this country
#bestphotochallengeToday #bestphoto#
2023 SCMR 246 SUPREME-COURT
Mst. TAYYEBA AMBAREEN VS SHAFQAT ALI KIYANI
S. 5 & Sched.--Suit for restitution of conjugal rights- Approach to be adopted by Courts when deciding such suit- -Husband, duty of-Scope---When a husband claims restitution of conjugal rights in response to the suit for dissolution of marriage, dower, dowry and maintenance filed by the wife, it is an onerous responsibility of the Court to see whether he is sincerely fulfilling his obligations towards his wife, rather than gratifying the urges of male chauvinism---Lodging of claim for restitution of conjugal rights should not be used as weapon to defend or obstruct the claim of dower or maintenance allowance, but must be lodged in good faith and with a bona fide intention to reconcile and rectify the issues between the spouses in order to save the matrimonial tie with magnanimity, kindness and through the fulfillment of the husband's obligations and not as a tool to fight out or frustrate the claim of maintenance allowance or dower amo
(11.5.24) Tomorrow full day Strike in whole Punjab on call of Punjab bar Council
اگر صوبہ پنجاب میں کسی وکیل صاحب کے خلاف انسدادِ دہشت گردی کا کوئی مقدمہ بابت عدالتی امور درج ہے تو پنجاب بار کونسل کو کاپی ارسل کی جائے
پنجـاب بـار کــونسل
Zero tolerance for lockdown of the Courts shall be observed. Necessary legal action shall be taken and FIRs may immediately be lodged in such cases to secure the sanctity of the Courts irrespective of the status/ office of the accused/ contemnor involved in such like activities.
The Lawyers shall not be allowed to enter the Court Rooms for observance of the strikes.
It will be duty of the State/ Government to provide foolproof security to the Courts, and in case of any failure in this respect all the concerned including Police, security agencies and the Government functionaries shall be held responsible.
iv. The names of the Lawyers showing contemptuous behavior towards the Courts shall be blocked by the Computer Branch of the concerned District Courts and the High Court. His cases may be transferred to other Stations. The said steps shall be taken apart from any other legal proceedings taken against him in accordance with the law.
Committee shall be constituted to resolve the problems/issues between the Bar and the Bench. Negotiations may be carried out between the Bar and the Bench. The Hon'ble Chief Justice may not be involved in such negotiations.
عدالتوں کے لاک ڈاؤن کے لیے زیرو ٹالرنس کا مشاہدہ کیا جائے گا۔ ضروری قانونی کارروائی کی جائے گی اور ایسے معاملات میں فوری طور پر ایف آئی آر درج کی جا سکتی ہیں تاکہ عدالتوں کے تقدس کو محفوظ بنایا جا سکے، اس طرح کی سرگرمیوں میں ملوث ملزم/مذکورہ کی حیثیت/دفتر سے قطع نظر۔
وکلاء کو ہڑتال کے دوران کورٹ رومز میں داخل ہونے کی اجازت نہیں ہوگی۔
عدالتوں کو فول پروف سیکورٹی فراہم کرنا ریاست / حکومت کا فرض ہوگا، اور اس سلسلے میں کسی قسم کی ناکامی کی صورت میں تمام متعلقہ بشمول پولیس، سیکورٹی ایجنسیاں اور حکومتی عہدیدار ذمہ دار ہوں گے۔
iv عدالتوں کے تئیں توہین آمیز رویے کا مظاہرہ کرنے والے وکلاء کے نام متعلقہ ضلعی عدالتوں اور ہائی کورٹ کی کمپیوٹر برانچ کے ذریعے بلاک کر دیے جائیں گے۔ اس کے مقدمات دوسرے تھانوں میں منتقل کیے جا سکتے ہیں۔ مذکورہ اقدامات قانون کے مطابق اس کے خلاف کی جانے والی کسی بھی دوسری قانونی کارروائی کے علاوہ اٹھائے جائیں گے
بار اور بنچ کے درمیان مسائل/مسائل کو حل کرنے کے لیے ڈی کمیٹی تشکیل دی جائے گی۔ بار اور بنچ کے درمیان مذاکرات ہو سکتے ہیں۔ عزت مآب چیف جسٹس ایسے مذاکرات میں شامل نہیں ہو سکتے
2011 کے بعد پہلی بار
پاکستان اذلان شاہ ہاکی کپ کے فائنل میں
ہفتے کو جاپان سے مقابلہ ہوگا
دونوں ٹیموں کے 10 دس پوائنٹس
کوئی تیسری ٹیم آس پاس نہیں
پی ٹی وی کو اس پورے ٹورنامنٹ کا علم ہی نہیں
حکومت نے ایف آئی اے کی طرح نیشنل سائبر کرائم انویسٹیگیشن ایجنسی نامی نیا ادارہ قائم کر دیا۔ سربراہ ڈائریکٹر جنرل کم از کم گریڈ 21 کا ہو گا جس کےاختیارات آئی جی کے برابر ہوں گے اور یہ سوشل میڈیا پر جعلی خبروں، سکیموں اور بے بنیاد پروپیگنڈے کی تحقیقات کر سکے گا
چین کے شہر ہانزو (Hangzhou) کی آبادی دو کروڑ دس لاکھ ہے، یہ دنیا کا پہلا اسمارٹ پولیسنگ شہر ہے، حکومت نے شہر میں چالیس ہزار اسمارٹ کیمرے لگ...
