Find a Lawyer

SYED SHAH FAHAD versus STATE

Section 497 (2) Crimes Against Property (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance (VI 1979), Section 17 (4) Haraba Bail, In addition to the grant of further investigation, the accused was made the accused in principle, which was also guaranteed by the High Court. Was rejected. Because there were strong contradictory circumstances and because the crime was brutally done. There is no compelling evidence against the accused on the entire available record that expects the statement of the co-accused listed under Section 161, CRPC, that did not fall within it. The defendant was granted bail due to a further investigation into the matter in the legal evidence circle

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2013

• YOUNAS KHAN v. State 2013 MLD 48
• ZARGHUN SHAH v. State 2013 MLD 57
• MURAD GUL v. THE STATE through Advocate-General Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Peshawar 2013 PLD 58
• ALI RAHMAN v. NAIK AMAL KHAN 2013 PLD 61
• GHULAM NABI, ADVOCATE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN, PRESIDENT ISLAMIC LAWYER MOVEMENT KHYBER PAKHTUNKHW v. GOVERNMENT OF KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA 2013 PLD 64
• TANVIR-UD-DIN v. NATIONAL RADIO TELECOMMUNICATION CORPORATION (PVT.) LTD. 2013 PLC(CS) 69
• SHAD MUHAMMAD KHAN v. State 2013 YLR 71
• Senator Haji GHULAM ALI v. KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA OLYMPIC ASSOCATION 2013 PLD 71

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2013 →

famous high court advocate from Bisham lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes