LAHORE – Family Registration Certificate shows family composition of the applicant by birth or by marriage.
The identity document is issued by the National Database and Registration Authority (NADRA). If a person is not registered in NADRA and does not hold 13 digit ID number, his/her data will not be reflected in FRC.
categories of FRC
With parents and siblings (by birth) With spouse and children (by marriage)
S. 133 Conditional order for removal of nuisance.
Magistrate could proceed with any application under S.133, Cr.P.C., but, when the civil court of competent jurisdiction was proceeding with the matter, the Magistrate, or any other judicial office holder, was debarred from entertaining the same cause between the same parties.
When the matter was sub judice before the civil court, the Magistrate was not competent, even to pass any conditional order.
2013 P Cr. L J 1076
[Supreme Court (AJ&K)]
Present Ch. Muhammad Ibrahim Zia and Sardar Muhammad Sadiq Khan, JJ
Dr. KARAMAT HUSSAIN---Appellant
Versus
SHAMS-U-DIN and 5 others---Respondents
Criminal Appeal No.58 of 2012, decided on 19th January, 2013.
(On appeal from the judgment of the High Court dated 11-5-2012 passed in Criminal Revision No.1 of 2011.)
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
S. 133---Conditional order for removal of nuisance---Scope---Controversial issue regarding removal of encroachment upon road being sub judice before the civil court, an application was moved by the appellant for initiation of proceedings under S.133, Cr.P.C. before the Deputy Commissioner, with regard to the same subject-matter which was already pending before the civil court.
Magistrate could proceed with any application under S.133, Cr.P.C., but, when the civil court of competent jurisdiction was proceeding with the matter, the Magistrate, or any other judicial office holder, was debarred from entertaining the same cause between the same parties.
When the matter was sub judice before the civil court, the Magistrate was not competent, even to pass any conditional order.
فیملی کورٹ 1964 کے مطابق اجرا کو ہایئکورٹ کے ذریعہ دوسرے ضلع میں بھجوایا جانا ضروری نہ ھے.
According to the Family Court 1964, the issue does not need to be referred to another district by the High CourtIn order to avoid technical trapping, there remains no need to transfer the execution petition to any other Court out of one district to the other district where the judgment debtor resides. The learned Executing Court seized of the matter may adopt procedure provided under law by sending a precept through proper channel to the Court where the judgment debtor resides or has movable/immovable property so as to attach the same and recover the decretal amount as
*#PREPOSITIONS_OF_TIME*
*#AT*
'At' is used for precise times
• *At* 10.30am
• *At* 8 o'clock
• *At* bedtime
• *At* breakfast
• *At* Christmas
• *At* dawn/dusk
• *At* dinnertime
• *At* midday
• *At* night/noon
• *At* Southern
• *At* sunrise/sunset
• *At* ten o'clock
• *At* that time
• *At* the beginning
• *At* the end
• *At* the moment
• *At* the present
• *At* the same time
• *At* the weekend
*#IN*
'In' is used for months, years, decades, centuries, and long periods of time
• *In* 16 year's time
• *In* 1991
• *In* December
• *In* January
• *In* the 1970's
• *In* the 21st century
• *In* the 70's
• *In* the afternoon
• *In* the Christmas holiday
• *In* the Dark Ages
• *In* the evening
• *In* the future
• *In* the morning
• *In* the past
• *In* the seventies
• *In* the Summer
• *In* this century
*#ON*
'On' is used for days and dates
• *On* a Summer evening
• *On* Christmas day
• *On* Christmas
• *On* Friday
• *On* holiday
• *On* January 3rd
• *On* my birthday
• *On* my wedding day
• *On* that day
• *On* the 10th
• *On* the 10th of January
• *On* the first day
• *On* the last day
• *On* Tuesday night
• *On* Wednesday
• *On* Wednesday*
Case Laws on Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997
Absence of any apparent reason to falsely implicate the accused for possession of 15.6 kg of narcotic, negated the hypothesis of fake imposition---Methodology adopted by accused of transporting drugs while travelling with wife and children was not unusual in drug trafficking cases---Presence of a lady constable who frisked and arrested the wife/co-accused went a long way to support the prosecution case---Inspector and lady constable (official witnesses) furnished details of the arrest and recovery; their statements were in a comfortable and confident unison on all the salient aspects of the raid as well as details collateral therewith---Prosecution had proved its case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. 2021 SCMR 198
Non-association of witnesses from the public---Supreme Court observed that absence of a witness from the public, despite possible availability was not a new phenomenon; it was reminiscent of a long drawn apathy depicting public reluctance to come forward in assistance of law, due to exasperating legal procedures and lack of witness protection---In such circumstances, evidence of official witnesses was the only available option to combat the menace of drug trafficking with the assistance of functionaries of the State; their evidence, if found confidence inspiring, may implicitly be relied upon without hesitation, as their status as witnesses was second to none. 2021 SCMR 198
R. 6---Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S. 9(c)---Possession of narcotics---Report of Government Analyst---protocol s/procedure---Scope---Substantial/sufficient compliance with R. 6 of the Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001 ('Rule 6')---Plea on behalf of accused that forensic report in the present case did not mention the details of protocol s used, as such the nature of contraband was never established---Held, that tests carried out by the analyst were vividly mentioned in his report, under the heading "Test Performed on Received Item(s) of Evidence" followed by the heading "Results and Conclusions"---Said details in the forensic report substantially/sufficiently qualified to meet the statutory requirements under R. 6 of Control of Narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001---Conviction of accused under S. 9(c) of Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997 was maintained---Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed. 2020 SCMR 460 SHAZIA BIBI vs State
Any test conducted without a protocol lost its reliability and evidentiary value---To serve the purposes of the Control of narcotic Substances Act, 1997 and the Control of narcotic Substances (Government Analysts) Rules, 2001, the report of the Government Analyst must contain three elements, i.e the tests applied; the protocols applied to carry out these tests; and, the result of the test(s)---Report of the Government Analyst which did not specify the protocols of the tests applied did not meet the
2022 CLC 492
Intent and object of Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 2017 is very much clear. According to which, if a property was purchased in the name of a person who according to his social status unable to have purchased any property by his own means, if found such property in his name then the Act ibid will come into play and will act upon the procedure as laid down in Section 22 of the Act ibid and such property shall be considered as “Benami property” and would be subject to confiscation in favour of the State. Section 22 provides that when the Initiating Officer has reason to believe on the basis of material in his possession that any person is a Benamidar in respect of a property, he may issue a notice of show cause that why should not be treated such property as a Benami property and after making inquiry and calling for evidence draw up a statement of case and refer it to the Adjudicating Authority. After receipt of the reference proceedings for adjudication of Benami property shall start by the adjudicating authority under Section 24 of the Act, ibid. It is manifest from the reading of above mentioned provision of law that Civil Court shall have no jurisdiction to entertain any suit or proceedings in respect of any matter to which any of the authorities or the tribunal is empowered by or under the Act to determine.
ایف آئی آر درج کرنے کی درخواست پر جسٹس آف پیس کو پاور نہیں کہ وہ درخواست خارج کرتے وقت درخواست گذار پر جرمانہ لگائے۔
NO POWER TO LODGE FIR AS PETITION DISMISSED BY HIM PLJ 2022 Cr.C. (Note) 19
PLJ 2022 Cr.C. (Note) 19
Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)--
----Ss. 22-A & B & 561-A--Application u/S. 22-A & B for registration of FIR--There is no provision under law for imposing cost in such a manner as mentioned in impugned order--Application filed under Section 22-A B, Cr.P.C. may be allowed or dismissed but no such action can be taken against applicant--Since counsel for applicant has shown his grievance upto extent of cost only, therefore, impugned order is amended and directions regarding imposition of cost of Rs. 25000/- to be deposited with library of Taluka Bar Association Mirwah is set aside--Application disposed of.
MUTATION CASE LAWS 2007 CLC 36
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1e9-CC7XbWLx_h2wvo7esltRSeGULosmc/view?usp=sharing
O. VII, R. 11----Rejection of plaint---Principles----Plaint cannot be rejected in piecemeal---Plaint can only be rejected if all reliefs claimed by plaintiffs are barred under law---Even if one of the prayers is maintainable, plaint cannot be rejected under O.VII, R.11 of C.P.C.
PLD 2016 Sindh 26
Before Irfan Saadat Khan and Zafar Ahmed Rajput, JJ
Civil Appeal
No. 634/2014 and Civil Appeals No.431 & 432/2020
(On appeal from the judgment/Order dated 8.5.2012 and
dated 20.4.2018 passed by the Peshawar High Court, Peshawar in W.P.3095/2011 and W.P.No.3058/2011).
The Lahore High Court Chief Justice Muhammad Qasim Khan on Monday slammed the victim-blaming remarks made by Lahore's Capital City Police Officer (CCPO) Mohammad Umar Sheikh saying that the entire cabinet should apologise for the comments.
In a hearing over a petition to initiate a judicial inquiry over the Lahore motorway gang-rape case, LHC chief justice said the government may do so if it wishes and that it is legally possible.
"Read the law and let me know as well under what clause shall the court issue such an order," Justice Khan said. "Don't file petitions just to get them in the news."
The government-appointed lawyer told the court a first information report (FIR) had already been registered and an investigation underway.
