Find a Lawyer

FAQIR HUSSAIN versus SALEEM UR REHMAN

Following the appreciation of the evidence of both parties regarding the conflict of law violations Articles 145, 200, 537 and 561 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CCPC), the trial magistrate directed that the applicants, if any, If displaced from disputed lands, they should be seized. The feeling of grief in both the parties was revised and the reviewing court rejected the petitioners' complaint that the trial magistrate did not meet the mandatory formal code of conduct such as Section 200, CRPC. The complainant or his lawyer's statements were not recorded on the oath. The trial magistrate had committed illegal acts which were not curable under section 373737. Under PC Verification Section 373737, all errors, omissions or irregularities in the proceedings before the CCP competent courts were treatable, unless such error, error or irregularity was in fact presented under the definition of justice. Would not Section 37, Cr, CRPC, disclosing to this court that the decision of whether there was a mistake or not, and the proceedings under the Code of Conduct would have resulted in the failure of justice. Whether the matter should have been raised at an early stage in the hearing of the case or not, the matter was considered before the trial court twice, but not at any stage of the proceedings. No objection was made to the trial magistrate's alleged error in investigating the complainants under the meaning of Section 200; no such objection was raised when the CCPC raised such a complaint. Reason for non-inspection of dentures criminal advocate from Qasba Gujrat lawyer