MUHAMMAD NAVEED versus STATE
Section 8 and 18 of the Sindh Buildings Control Ordinance (v. 1979), Sections 10 and 21 of the Criminal Procedure Code (V9 1898), Sections 200, 202 and 561 of the Sections 200 and 202 mandatory provisions were violated. Was. The CCP, in dealing with the complaints, did not make any agreement in accordance with Section 8 of the Sindh Cultural Heritage (Protection) Act, 1994 and at any time between the accused and the Heritage Department in connection with the building protection and proceedings under section 18. The contract was not signed. He said that the law was illegal and that the authority concerned about misusing the process of law had issued a declaration on the condition of the building itself that it could collapse at any time. The mill's expert magistrate also lost sight of the fact that the architectural and engineering associates certified that the building had already been demolished and that the remaining walls were in dilapidated process. Were banned
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
list of supreme court advocates from Samma Satta lawyer
