MUHAMMAD ARIF IJAZ KHOKHAR versus THE STATE
The only evidence against the accused in the section 497 (2) Conventional Code (XLV of 1860), section 420/468/471/467/407/109 bail, further investigation was the fact that he had confirmed the bank guarantee, but The prosecution was unable to submit to anyone. The evidence linking the commission to the crime, because its signature was never found, nor was it compared with the alleged signature of the Bank Guarantee Investigation, which revealed that the bank guarantee was fake. The paper on which the bank guarantee was prepared was purchased by the co-accused and it was. The co-accused, who forged the signature, says that the facts were made against the accused and were open for questioning. The accused was admitted in bail.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
list of supreme court advocates from Hangu lawyer
