Find a Lawyer

FAROOQ AHMAD KHAN versus AZAD GOVERNMENT OF THE STATE OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR

Pakistan Penal Code Sections 193 and 199 Criminal Procedure (v. 1898), 5 476 Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Authorization Act (VIII of 1974), Sections 42 and 44, in the evidence of the appellants, it was claimed that the High Court was denied. Was not allowed to do Initiate proceedings against the respondents under Sections 193 and 199, for the PPC to correct the errors committed by it, the High Court had to see whether there had been a mistake in relation to the proceedings before and Even if it is better to act against the respondent or not, the action against a person in making a false statement can be made only if the relevant court had discovered that in fact he had already committed the error. Where the writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed and the defendant's arguments are retained, the High Court further Could not grow. Especially against the defendant especially when the court observed that it was not necessary to take action against the defendant in the circumstances of the case. The URT, before complaining in such a case, had to inquire under the CCP, 47 476, after giving notice to the person who, in the absence of the appellant's prayer for such proceedings, would have made a The directive should be issued. High Court dismissed for action against false action against respondent in High Court female advocates from Rohri lawyer