Find a Lawyer

ABDUL RAUF versus RUSTAM ALI MALIK

Pakistan Penal Code Section 420/109 Corruption Prevention Act (II of 1947), Section 5 (2) Criminal Procedure (V9 1898), Section 265K Accountability Ordinance (CXI of 1996), Section 15 National Accountability Bureau Ordinance ( XVIII of 1999), after the prosecution of the accused under section Constitution33 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Request for Accountability Ordinance 1996 and section 265, CRPC, the court in the trial It was dismissed without mere observation. There is sufficient basis for prosecuting the accused and without further evidence it cannot be known that there is no proper basis for proceeding with the trial of the accused under section 33, National Accountability Bureau Ordinance, 1999. There were. It would not be necessary to call back a witness or record any evidence that was recorded, the trial court had taken unlawful action to stop it. After recording any evidence, the court could not maintain that there was no proper basis for proceeding for the trial of the accused, as these words were not used at any stage of the CRPC of section 265. Were. And the recording of evidence was not an argument for any reason. At the trial, during the trial, at the trial stage, it cannot be proved that, without recording any other evidence, to proceed to the trial. There is no proper basis. Earlier, requests for requests from the accused / applicant were requested and their application was required, so it was decided by Merit T pakistani advocates Sita Road lawyer