Find a Lawyer

IMAM BUX versus THE STATE

Prevention of Section 409 of the Corruption Act (II of 1947), after the formation of section 5 (2) allegations, the prosecutor failed to investigate despite the prosecution's repeated testimony and could not be reproduced or for a period of 10 years. I can only examine three of the prosecution. The witness subpoena was discontinued and the accused's statement was recorded under section 342; the CCP charge states that as a civil servant, heavy money was deposited on articles which he could not calculate. And thus criminal breach of trust, although the prosecutor's case was absolutely flawed against the accused and the testimony of key prosecutors was not examined to prove the charge against the accused from 1983 to 1995. The accused was convicted in this case while the charge was very flawed, so it was said in the case. Due to patent irregularities that would lead to severe doubts, the story of the prosecutor failed to prove his case beyond doubt, the trial court recorded the trial against the accused and The sentence was set aside. list of supreme court advocates from Kech lawyer