Find a Lawyer

JAVED TARIQ KHAN versus THE STATE

Article 15, 9 (c), 25 and 32 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (v. 1898) of the National Accountability Bureau Ordinance 1999, Section 63 had entered into an agreement with the Punjab Co-operative Board for ratification, in which the entire outstanding loan of Rs. Agreed to be cleared. 8 50.26, 3266 in six installments ended on 31st, 2002, 2002, 2002, 2002, which was considered in the lated in of the NAB Ordinance Syed Pact, but in case of a breach it will be re-investigated and The re-arrest was followed by a final report following a re-arrest. Under Section 737373, the CCP was not presented to the Accountability Court, for all intents and purposes the release of the accused was a discharge under section 6363, the CRPC, which could have led to the cancellation or re There was no money to withhold the investigation. There were two aspects of the impugned order; one was the administrative and the other, the judicial release of the accused reflected that aspect, while its disqualification under section 15 showed the subsequent dimension of the NAB Ordinance that the court could not approve such a court order. The reason is that the reference was not confiscated against the accused and secondly that the accused had not deposited any stolen loan or assets with the NAB under section 25. The order of the NAB Ordinance was a final order applicable to the High Court of Appeal's jurisdiction under section 32 of the NAB Ordinance, accused of a non-hearing application filed by the Chairman NAB in 1999 before the Accountability Court. The affidavit was approved without a hearing. Under Section 9 (c) of the NAB Ordinance, they were only required to release the accused because they did not have the agreement between the accused and the NAB authorities. how to become a advocate from Nilam lawyer