Find a Lawyer

RIFAT ULLAH KHAN versus STATE

Section 1 561 A & 154 of the Conduct Rule (XLV of 1860), Section 496A A woman may be lodged an FIR or detained or detained or charged with the use of her hereditary power. It should be noted that the contents of the FIR were incorrect and that the contents of the FIR's illegal review constituted an unrecognizable commission and qualified for an appeal under Section 6161, ACRPC, to reach the correct conclusion. In the jurisdiction of the jurisdiction, appropriate investigation, investigation and supportive and contradictory evidence was required. The circumstances under which the termination of the FIR was unfair as the application for termination of the FIR was dismissed as there was no substance.

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2013

• ANWAR JAVAID v. State 2013 YLR 995
• Nawabzada MUHAMMAD USMAN KHAN v. Nawabzada MUHAMMAD FATEH KHAN 2013 YLR 1001
• MUHAMMAD SADIQ, LECTURER v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Education 2013 MLD 1004
• NOOR WALI KHAN v. ESSA MIR 2013 YLR 1006
• Syed TASKEEN ALI SHAH v. MUHAMMAD AMIN 2013 YLR 1015
• RASHID KHAN v. BASHIR 2013 MLD 1026
• SHER RAHMAN v. State 2013 PCrLJ 1028
• WATAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR v. GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA 2013 CLC 1028

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2013 →

immigration advocate from Dera Nawab Sahib lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes