Find a Lawyer

FAQIR ULLAH versus KHALIL-UZ-ZAMAN

Constitution of Pakistan 1973 Arts 188 and 25 Supreme Court Rules, 1980, AXXVI, R1 Panel Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 302, 306, 307 and 308 Maxim Audi Ultiram Partime - Order of the Supreme Court to be revised It was held that the Supreme Court passed under Article 184 (3) of the Constitution was not only a violation of the provisions of section 302 (b) (c), PPC, but also that the court had made section 302 (a) 306 (c) 307 and 308, PPC was even more misleading. The petitioner, who was the father of the deceased and also the complainant in connection with the murder of his daughter, was not made a party to the proceedings as a result of the unidentified decision which was not only against the integration of Islam but also against Article 25. Was violated. A constitution that guarantees equality before the law of all citizens and the equal protection of the law for them. This principle of natural justice was barred from depriving the applicant of the right to a hearing, and the complainant of this case was given a verdict by decision without notice which also affected his right. Was, as was the quorum non-Joyce validity order. The deceased's father was and he also filed an FIR and similarly the complainant was violated Article 25 of the Constitution. The Maxim Audi ultimum party (should not be heard from anyone) was not limited to proceedings which were judicial in nature but extended to all proceedings, by which anyone was held, who was the other party's rights in the dispute. Or affecting the property, both the complainant and the guardian were an integral part in the murder and injury to the body; therefore, the case of the accused or the compliant applicant / complainant, therefore, the court best law firms from Kharan lawyer