MUHAMMAD RAMZAN versus TAJ MUHAMMAD
No overt act was convicted of murder of the accused in section 497 (5) of the Conventional Code (XLV of 1860), section 302/449/34 of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), section 13D. , The accused is guaranteed neither was canceled nor challenged, and no doubt the accused's case was proceeding on that basis and the principle of consistency has no other alternative for the sessions court. But was not charged with tampering with evidence or bail to provide him with bail. The petition states that the score will be rejected on the basis of any legal reason for the cancellation of the bail, and therefore, the Sessions Court accused the plaintiff was fully justified in using his discretion to grant the bail. The bail was excluded accordingly
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
immigration advocates phone number from Bhan Saeedabad lawyer
