Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASLAM versus S.H.O.

Criminal Code of Conduct (CR PC) Section 265K Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Section 2014/409/408/471/109 Corruption Prevention Act (II of 1947), Section 5 (2) In the section 6565, filed under section 6565, the trial court before the CRPC sought its verdict on the ground that neither the prosecution had presented any evidence against them in support of the charges against them. Nor does the prosecutor have any evidence to prove the charges against the Investigation Officer against them, on such request, in the light of the dismissal of the accused and the application of the Investigation Officer to the Inquiry Officer. In the light of the petition, the petition was transferred to the trial court, dismissing it on the ground that the court had not yet learned about the matter and that unless the court acted that it would acquit the accused. And neither can it be submitted that the challan was not submitted by the Investigation Officer through the prosecution's request for removal of the accused MBD. Unanimous views of the Federal Investigation Agency's top workers, in fact, the prosecutor did not have any evidence that such a request to prove the allegation against the accused and by all concerned The reports made were for all intents and purposes. Section 737373, the final report within CRPC's deliberations that could constitute the basis of a legacy order legally for the accused to formally impose a bribe order in favor of the accused, It was also not a condition on which to sue. This confession from the prosecution patent advocate from Abbaspur lawyer