Mir & Yousafzai Law Chamber

Mir & Yousafzai Law Chamber Provides Legal Services in the fields of Service Laws, Criminal Laws, Family Laws, Constitutional La

15/04/2026

PLD 2026 SC 37
2026 PLC(CS) 233

Whether a person's status as an Absconder in a criminal case can operate as a bar to the pursuit of civil or service-law remedies---Legality---The right of access to justice cannot be curtailed merely because a person stands accused, or has absconded, in another domain of law.
Abscondence in criminal proceedings---Person's status as a proclaimed offender---Effect upon his right to pursue civil or service remedies---Its legal consequences would be confined to the criminal sphere only---Criminal fugitivity and civil adjudication of rights---Highlighted as two distinct legal domains---Brief facts of the matter were that the petitioners were appointed as 'junior vernacular teachers' nearly twenty-five years ago, but their appointments were later declared bogus by the education department resulting in stoppage of their salaries, though no formal removal order had yet been passed and their service appeal seeking release of salaries was dismissed by the Punjab Service Tribunal solely on the ground that they were Absconder s in a separate criminal case---Pivotal issue requiring determination before the Supreme Court was as to "whether the status of an Absconder or fugitive in a criminal case, by itself, barred or disentitled a person from pursuing civil or service law remedies before a competent forum?"---Held: Principle that a fugitive or Absconder could not invoke courts appellate jurisdiction in a criminal matter was strictly confined to criminal proceedings and its extension into civil, family, or service-law contexts found no support in either doctrine or policy---Civil and service adjudications determined rights over property, employment, or entitlements that were enforceable irrespective of the claimant's physical custody, and the litigant's absence seldom frustrated the process or its execution---Unless a statute expressly provided otherwise or the fugitivity demonstrably obstructed adjudication, abscondence in a criminal matter could not extinguish or suspend independent civil or service rights---Any disadvantage arising from the status of a proclaimed offender ordinarily attached only to the very case in which the proclamation was issued and did not extend to other matters lacking nexus to that proceeding---Accordingly, a proclaimed offender could not, merely by virtue of that status, be barred from instituting or defending a civil suit or prosecuting an appeal concerning his civil rights and obligations---To dismiss the petitioners solely based on their alleged abscondence was, therefore, a clear misapplication of law, as it conflated two distinct jurisdictions and deprived the petitioners of adjudication on issues squarely within their civil and service rights---
ALLAH DIWAYA VS DIRECTOR EDUCATION QUETTA

02/01/2026

(1) The Tribunal is obligated to examine whether the promotion was out of turn or not?

(2) Whether the promotion is out of turn or not can only be decided on the basis of service record

(3) Factual controversy was required to be resolved by the Tribunal, being an ultimate judicial fact-finding forum with exclusive jurisdiction.

C.P.L.A.954-K/2025
Muhammad Azam v. Province of Sindh through Secretary Home Dept. and others
Mr. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar
03-09-2025

17/12/2025

2025 SCMR 2078
Mere pendency of a petition before this Court does not, by itself, operate as a stay of proceedings, which may only be lawfully restrained by an express injunctive order of the Court. Thus, administrative inaction premised on the mere pendency of further proceedings, without any lawful restraint, is both unjustified and impermissible.

It is particularly regrettable that despite the clear pronouncement of this Court in Rashid Baig’s case (supra)expressing disapproval of such misuse of procedural pendency, the same practice continues unabated. This reflects not merely individual lapses, but a persistent pattern of administrative disregard for binding remand orders, which in itself constitutes systemic failure requiring urgent redress.

To address this matter, the Court required the personal attendance of the Senior Member, Board of Revenue, Punjab. He assured the Court that clear and comprehensive policy guidelines would be issued at the provincial level, directing all relevant authorities to implement remand orders promptly and without delay, unless expressly restrained by an injunctive order of a competent Court. He further undertook to ensure monitoring of compliance and to submit a report on the current status of all such pending remanded cases under his jurisdiction. Such measures are essential to uphold the foundations of lawful governance, and it must be reiterated that failure by the relevant authorities to observe established principles requiring prompt compliance with remand orders would frustrate the administration of justice and violate their constitutional duty.

C.P.L.A.2915-L/2015
Chief Land Commissioner, Punjab/Senior Member Board of Revenue Punjab, Lahore, etc v. Administrator Auqaf Department, Bahawalpur, etc

26/09/2025

Custody of minor---Remarriage of mother---Effect---Mere fact of mother's Remarriage does not ipso facto disentitle her from the custody of minor.
PLD 2025 SC 541

26/09/2025

2025 SCMR 1599

Call Data Record (CDR) must bear the endorsement/authentication of the cellular / telecom company which has issued it. A bare document such as the CDR without any signature of the concerned officer of the cellular /telecom company issuing the CDR cannot be considered for the purposes of trial and relied upon until and unless it bears the company's seal or a letter of its authentication.
crl.p.132 of 2018
Khair Muhammad and other vs State

27/04/2025

*2022 SCMR 667*

Evidence of witness, recording of--Slip of tongue, correction of---Scope---Court in order to. declare any fact deposed by a witness as a slip of tongue as required to look into the material available on record---When evidence of a witness was taken down in appealable cases, the procedure was provided under O. XVIII, R. 5 of the C.P.C.--After recording statement it was read over to a witness and that was the time when the witness could tell that any recorded information was a slip of tongue or it was wrongly recorded--In case any information or any portion of statement was recorded wrongly, the party had a right to move for correction of the same before the completion of the proceedings of the said date--When a statement was recorded, at the end it was read over to the witness and a witness had a right to move for correction if any part of the statement was wrongly recorded.

16/02/2025

Substantive law and procedural law---Distinction---Substantive law defines rights, while procedural law deals primarily with the process or remedies involved---Procedural law initiates and guides the process and course of action through which the lawsuit progresses and the way in which court proceedings are undertaken---It also regulates and oversees the procedures employed---Substantive law, on the other hand, comprises statutory obligations relevant to the subject matter, declaring the applicable rights and obligations,and regulating the demeanor of an individual or government---Substantive law determines the conduct and relations of the parties inter se in respect of the matter litigated, whereas the procedural law regulates the conduct and relations of Courts and litigants in respect of the litigation---Substantive law deals with the ends which the administration of justice contemplates while the procedural law deals with the means and instruments by which the ends of administration of justice are to be attained---The question as to what facts constitute a wrong is determined by substantive law, while what facts constitute proof of a wrong is a question of procedure---Substantive law defines the rights whereas the law of procedure defines the modes and conditions of the application of one to the other---Substantive law relates to the matter outside the Courts, whereas the procedural law regulates affairs inside the Courts.
2025 SCMR 303

16/02/2025

2025 SCMR 303

Procedural law---Prospective and retrospective application---Outcome of legislation or changes in law that pertain solely to the procedures or legal remedies indicates that if legislation is enacted with the primary intent to alter or modify procedural aspects without prejudicing the rights of the litigants, then no doubt, it will apply to all pending and future actions---Individuals do not possess a vested right in any particular course of procedure, so for all intents and purposes, the change in the law of procedure operates retrospectively---However, laws affecting, curtailing or prejudicing vested rights shall be applied prospectively.

26/01/2025

2020 CLC 1652
Suit for specific performance---Suit was dismissed for non-prosecution---Application for restoration of suit---"Sufficient cause"---Scope---Application for restoration of suit dismissed in default was dismissed by the Trial Court but Appellate Court accepted the same---Validity---Earlier suit was dismissed for want of prosecution but same was restored on the basis of conceding statement of defendant subject to payment of Costs ---Plaintiff had not paid said Costs and even no application for extension of time for payment of the same had been moved---Non-deposit of Costs would mean that suit was never restored---Application for restoration of suit was lacking any sufficient cause in the present case---Applicant had moved present application on the basis of general and vague assertions wherein no reason for his absence or his counsel had been mentioned---Application was not supported by an affidavit of the counsel---Applicant for seeking indulgence of the Court had to demonstrate "sufficient cause' for his non-appearance---Suit was to be decided on merits instead of knocking out the parties on the basis of technicalities but whenever a suit was dismissed in default then plaintiff should mention a cause for such lapse---Provisions of O.IX, R.9, C.P.C. could not be dispensed with merely on the ground that suit was to be decided on merits---Court had to keep the scale of justice equal and provisions of O. IX, R.9, C.P.C. could not be used for the advantage of one party and disadvantage of the other---Parties should be vigilant while prosecuting their cause---Trial Court had rightly applied the law to the subject and application for restoration of suit was dismissed through a well-reasoned order---Impugned order passed by the Appellate Court was set aside and that of Trial Court was restored--

21/01/2025

Section 561-A, Cr.P.C., is curative in nature, to prevent the abuse of the process or otherwise to secure the ends of justice but cannot be construed as an alternative or substitute of the provisions contained under Sections 249-A or 265-K, Cr.P.C.

Crl.P.L.A.58-K/2023
Aurangzaib Alamgir v. Muhammad Sajid & others
PLD 2025 SC 53

Address

Office# 19, 1st Floor, Mascow Plaza Jinnah Avenue Blue Area
Islamabad
44000

Opening Hours

Monday 09:00 - 21:00
Tuesday 09:00 - 21:00
Wednesday 09:00 - 21:00
Thursday 09:00 - 21:00
Friday 09:00 - 21:00
Saturday 09:00 - 21:00

Telephone

+923315533123

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Mir & Yousafzai Law Chamber posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to Mir & Yousafzai Law Chamber:

Shortcuts

Share

Category