Section 156 (1) (89) Criminal Code of Conduct (V 1898), sections 173, 190 and 439 the trial court did not agree with the conclusion of the Investigation Officer and refused to exclude the accused from the case and police Instructed to submit an invoice. The High Court, using its amended jurisdiction, dismissed the case against the accused and directed the accused to hand over the allegedly smuggled item (gold) to the defendant, for reasons given by the trial court. Due to non-acceptance of the investigating officer's report. Based on the report of the Investigation Officer, the High Court could not exclude the accused's case and the exclusion matter, he said, adding that the reasons for the trial were neither abated nor defective. Not only did the High Court justify interference, both fake and irrational. Utilizing its jurisdiction under sections & 35 & & 9439, the PCC uproar of the High Court was completely misunderstood as it witnessed it in its entirety. In the case, the trial court was appointed accordingly without the permission of the trial court to record the evidence and examine its merits, and in the light of the matter, the trial court ordered the trial court to proceed according to law. Remand was received. Hits above
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
