Legal Consultancy "Lawyers"

Legal Consultancy "Lawyers" Contact information, map and directions, contact form, opening hours, services, ratings, photos, videos and announcements from Legal Consultancy "Lawyers", Lawyer & Law Firm, chamber no 08, Attock.

09/04/2026

2026 MLD 542

This judgement decides amendment to Section 43 of PECA via the 2025 Amendment Act, whereby certain offences have been converted from bailable to non-bailable, is substantive in nature or merely procedural. Based on the above, it is deliberated whether the Amendment Act will have prospective or retrospective applicability?

The amendment made to Section 43 of PECA through the Amendment Act whereby offences under Sections 13 and 14 of PECA have been converted into non-bailable (naeem)offences is not merely procedural but substantive in nature. Therefore, the same will apply prospectively because the grant of bail in bailable offences is an indefeasible vested (substantive) right to be granted as a matter of right, it is absolute and unconditional, with no contingencies affecting it. Reason being that although bail is sought under the rules of procedure, i.e., (naeem)the Code, but it pertains to the liberty and movement of the accused and the Amendment Act effects the said rights of the accused by making a previously bailable offence and converting it into non-bailable, thereby affecting the substantive right of the accused, i.e., to be released forthwith as a matter of right. To this end, it is trite, as expounded in the aforementioned cases that substantive right cannot be taken away or impaired retrospectively and any retrospective application of the Amendment Act will disturb the vested right of the accused and create legal(naeem) unfairness, making it impermissible under the settled principles of jurisprudence. As such, the Amendment Act, to this extent, will only apply prospectively. Answered in the above terms.

Crl. Misc.10519-B-24
MUHAMMAD RIZWAN VS
STATE ETC

09/04/2026

The law is quite settled by now that if the prosecution fails to prove its case against an accused person, then the accused person is to be acquitted, even if he had taken a plea and had thereby admitted killing the deceased.

Crl.A. No. 671-J of 2019
Muhammad Zafar Iqbal Vs. The State
2026 MLD 420

09/04/2026

The absence of any light source has put the whole prosecution case in the dark. It was admitted by the witnesses themselves that it was a dark night and as the prosecution witnesses failed to prove the availability of any light source, their statements with regard to them identifying the assailants, including the appellant, cannot be relied upon. The failure of the prosecution witnesses to prove the presence of any light source at the place of occurrence, at the time of occurrence, has repercussions, entailing the failure of the prosecution's case.
Crl.A. No. 671-J of 2019
Muhammad Zafar Iqbal Vs. The State
2026 MLD 420

09/04/2026

2026 MLD 420
The stamp of injuries on the person of a witness may be proof of his presence at the place of occurrence, at the time of occurrence, however the same can never guarantee a truthful deposition. Injuries received by a witness during an incident do not warrant acceptance of his evidence without scrutiny. At the most, such traumas can be taken as an indication of his presence on the spot, but still his evidence is to be scrutinized on the benchmark of principles laid down for the appraisal of evidence. It is not a given that a witness who suffered injuries during the occurrence will depose nothing but the truth. Even otherwise, it is not the simple presence of a witness at the crime scene but his credibility, which makes him a reliable witness. It has been held by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan repeatedly that the facts that an injured witness narrates are not to be implicitly accepted rather, they are to be attested and appraised on the principles applied for the appreciation of evidence of any prosecution witness, regardless of him being injured or not.
The proposition of law in Criminal Administration of Justice, that a common set of witnesses can be used for recording acquittal and conviction against the accused persons who were charged for the commission of same offence, is now a settled proposition. The august Supreme Court of Pakistan has repeatedly held that partial truth cannot be allowed and perjury is a serious crime. This view stems from the notion that once a witness is found to have lied about a material aspect of a case, it cannot then be safely assumed that the said witness will declare the truth about any other aspect of the case. I have noted that the view should be that "the testimony of one detected in a lie was wholly worthless and must of necessity be rejected." If a witness is not coming out with the whole truth, then his evidence is liable to be discarded as a whole, meaning thereby that his evidence cannot be used either for convicting accused or acquitting some of them facing trial in the same case. This proposition is enshrined in the maxim falsus in unofalsus in omnibus.
Criminal Appeal No. 671-J of 2019
(Muhammad Zafar Iqbal Vs. The State)

09/04/2026

2026 CLC 489

When a Family Court does not give adequate opportunity to file a written statement, an additional chance should be granted. It emphasized that speeding up a case should not lead to rushed decisions without proper judicial consideration. Courts must ensure that any decision made for the sake of expediency does not cause injustice or prejudice. In doing so, they must balance the principles that "justice delayed is justice denied" and "justice hurried is justice buried".
WP 71055/25
Muhammad Waqas Vs Judge Family Court etc

Valid for 72 hours (biomatric)
09/04/2026

Valid for 72 hours (biomatric)

تھانوں میں بائیومیٹرک لازمی!!آئی جی پنجاب کی جانب سے جاری کر دہ مراسلے میں کہا گیا ہے کے پنجاب کے تمام تھانوں میں اب کسی...
09/04/2026

تھانوں میں بائیومیٹرک لازمی!!

آئی جی پنجاب کی جانب سے جاری کر دہ مراسلے میں کہا گیا ہے کے پنجاب کے تمام تھانوں میں اب کسی بھی سائل، ملزم یا گواہ کا اندراج بغیر بائیومیٹرک تصدیق کے نہیں ہو سکے گا۔ نادرا کے تعاون سے پولیس سسٹم اپ گریڈ کر دیا گیا ہے۔ آئی جی پنجاب نے افسران کو مشینوں کی دستیابی یقینی بنانے کے لیے صرف 7 دن کا وقت دیا ہے۔ اب تھانوں میں ملازمین کی حاضری بھی ڈیجیٹل ہوگی !

case
07/04/2026

case

24/03/2026

Acquittal from Heroine Case.....

Eid ul Fitar Holidays
18/03/2026

Eid ul Fitar
Holidays

Courts will off from Friday to Sunday,o nly urgent cases will be observed. Regular days are Monday to Thursday.... Until...
11/03/2026

Courts will off from Friday to Sunday,o nly urgent cases will be observed. Regular days are Monday to Thursday.... Until the next notice.

25/02/2026

Crl.P.L.A.120/2026
Arshad Aziz Abbasi and others v. The Special Judge, Customs, Taxation & Anti-Smuggling-I, Karachi and another
Mr. Justice Aqeel Ahmed Abbasi
17-02-2026
While confronted with hereinabove factual and legal aspects of the instant case, learned counsel for the respondents could not dispute the same, however, submitted that proceedings initiated under the Act of 2010 are independent to the proceedings under the tax laws whereas the order of attachment under section 8 of the Act of 2010 is provisional in nature, therefore, the petitioners cannot assail the same by filing an appeal under section 23 of the Act which can be filed against the final decision. Such contention of the learned counsel for the respondents is misconceived as the order passed under section 8 of the Act of 2010 by itself is not an interim order, however, the words provisionally attach relates to the period not exceeding 180 days, which period is subject to further enhancement by the Court for a period upto 180 days. The order of attachment under section 8 of the Act of 2010 is otherwise final for the taxpayer whose all immovable and moveable properties, including bank accounts are attached without providing any opportunity of being heard, in consequence whereof, the entire business of the petitioners has come to an halt, whereas no other remedy whatsoever is provided under the Act of 2010 except to challenge the same by filing an appeal under section 23 of the Act of 2010 wherein it has been provided that “any person aggrieved by final decision or order of the Court may prefer an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order on any question of law or fact arising out of such decision or order”. The hereinabove provisions of law indicates that the legislature has used the word ‘final’ with the decision whereas such word has not been used with the order of the Court which prima facie shows that there is no distinction of interim order or final order for the purposes of filing an appeal under section 23 of the Act of 2010. As regards the objection raised by the learned counsel for the respondents as to the maintainability of the instant criminal petition for leave to appeal, we are of the opinion that in exceptional circumstances involving flagrant violation of law, wrongful exercise of jurisdiction or manifest grave injustice an aggrieved party can approach this Court in terms of Article 185(3) of the Constitution with the request to set aside even an interim order falling within the category of aforementioned exceptions.

Address

Chamber No 08
Attock

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Legal Consultancy "Lawyers" posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Share

Category