Find a Lawyer

ABDUL RAHIM versus MESSRS BEECHAM PAKISTAN (PVT.) LTD., KARACHI

Proof of a domestic inquiry must be different in criminal proceedings. Criminal proceedings involve the question of a citizen's liberty, so the prosecutor is bound to prove beyond any reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused, which is why the required evidence in a domestic inquiry is the basis on which a reasonable person can argue. End the premise that the accused in charge of the factory capsule prepared by the employer met with the scooter operated by a worker-run scooter when the factory premises were flown out that no one had any evidence. Was given or was not recorded from any evidence or circumstance, in the ordinary course, it would be, that the accused was taking the product of the employer from the factory premises without any authorization and such action was taken only on the employer's property. In connection with adultery, theft or dishonesty can be considered as the accused in reviewing the evidence in section 15 (3) (b) labor court. Under section 411 of the Penal Code being processed, 1 860 requires that it prove that the accused was convicted and that the property was stolen before concluding that there was any particular evidence. It was not to show that the capsules were stolen from the factory, thus setting aside the order of dismissal of the service. The discovery of a capsule that detects a reasonable and appropriate investigation into the domestic inquiry charge was proved in the Labor Court's domestic inquiry order, and the appellate tribunal restored the dismissal by the Meso Condit West Pakistan Industrial and Commercial Employment. Was gone Standing orders) best advocate from Mangla lawyer