FIRDAUS AHMAD KHAN versus THE STATE
Section 497 (2,) Code of Conduct (XLV of 1860), Sections 420/468/471 Corruption Prevention Act (II of 1947), Section 5 (2) Guarantee, more money allegedly drawn by unlawful accused Grants were returned by the accused and if the damage was deemed to have been made good, this alone makes the case against the accused suspicious and the inquiry is required to determine the crime of the accused in the official offense. In the case of the prosecution, there was no fear of tampering and there was no possibility of that. Evidence of his felony action was based on documents that were in the possession of the prosecutor, with the bail basically opposed that if the bail was extended, the defendants could tamper with the evidence, if the defendant bailed. If the sanctioned misconduct occurs, the state can prosecute it. The accused cannot be denied bail, in the relevant court, but at the bail-out stage, in the absence of evidence to support the charge.
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
law firms from FR Tank / DI Khan lawyer
