Find a Lawyer

KHALID MUKHTAR versus THE STATE

Section 9 Customs Act (IV of 1969), Sections 156 (1) (14) and (82) Criminal Code of Conduct (V9 1898), Section 561A Application for Termination of Corruption and Corruption Procedure, Current Matters I was, initially. In 1992, the case was presented to the Special Judge (Customs and Taxation) court, and after that the case was referred to the accountability court, in which the accused's judicial statement was that the complainant had filed three such cases. I was registered and the accused was not named and when filed before the Joint Interim Challan Special Judge (Customs and Taxation), he was not involved again but his name in the final challan I was added as an accused that an account was opened in 1991. On its introduction, in the name of a co-accused (as a bank manager) who had been submitted to the bank at the behest of another partner, the sole charge against the accused was withdrawn. It was straightforward that he, as the manager of the bank, had opened his own account of the partner in the bank, in the present case, had failed completely to show, if any, to open an account. If the commission was calculated, there would be no question of guilt because the account was opened only after the crime allegedly committed by the customs officers, exporters and bankers, Was completed and there was no evidence against it, nor was there any record. He has even received a commission from a far-flung alleged crime and, therefore, has no right to appeal against the applicant / accused before the court. best law firm from Jamshoro lawyer