Find a Lawyer

RAFIQUE AHMAD, S.S.O-II versus THE STATE

Section 498 Electricity Act (IX of 1910), bail before the arrest of section 39, the grant of charges against the accused (WAPDA employees) was that the owners of the mills, in association with the accused, removed the seals of WAPDA security and Tampering with sanctions. And thus Wapda suffered losses of millions of rupees, even if there was a dispute between Mills and Wapda, this dispute could not help the accused being falsely trapped by their superior officers. And the mill had nothing to do with the dispute. Wapda is accused of being an employee of Wapda for no reason and cannot be falsely implicated for any reason, especially since no allegation was made against a Wapda Bell executive engineer before his arrest. It was to protect innocent civilians if there is a possibility of false verdicts with Malala. It was clearly stated that the police had recorded the statements of other senior officers present on the occasion who had supported the complainant about the commissions, losing the power to the authority by slowing down the electric meter and stealing electricity. Accused of having a communion with the accused. Were not entitled to any extraordinary assistance criminal advocate from Village Sunder lawyer