Find a Lawyer

SAJJAD HUSSAIN versus S.H.O., POLICE STATION PINDIGHEB AND 4 OTHERS

On the basis of the investigation of sections 155 (2) and 561 of a Prohibited (Enforcement) Order (4 of 1979), Arts 3, 4, 16 and 22 unrecognized offenses, it was asked that the CIA Department, the police, have Nothing Article 16, the Prohibition (Head Enforcement) Order, 1979, and once under the I / CIA Registration and Police Party raid, the authority to register or investigate the matter when issues related to the FIR are made. Crime was not detected. The provisions of Article 22, Prohibition (Enforcement Head) Order, 1979 in the house of the accused were violated. 1979 The detainees were terminated with the observation that it was mentioned in the FIR that senior officers were being transferred to seek interrogation in the case of the accused. And the inquiry was granted on the same day that the accused was booked and the offense was an acceptable offense under Article 3, Prohibition (Enforcement Hadith) Order 1979, irrespective of the question whether it was publicly Whether or not it was done on the spot where the case was registered in connection with both unrecognizable and unrelated cases, Section 155 (2), CR PC was not attracted and all such cases without police permission Can investigate matters. Magistrate's case against not being an accused in which police raided information or information through an informant, but during interrogation when the co-accused, who revealed himself to be the accused's accomplice or partner , You started storing it. Illegal alcohol, and all other things found on the identification of such partner, Article 22, Prohibited (Enforcement) Order, 1979, therefore, against the accused patent advocate from Khuiratta lawyer