Find a Lawyer

BASHIR AHMAD versus ZAFAR-UL-ISLAM

Section 616161 Critical questions regarding the scope of a widespread action that must be decided before a final decision has to be made and a final decision must be made on the basis of these offenses or their innocence. can go. This could not be done unless witnesses were examined and investigations were allowed under Section 342, CR PC or under section 340 (2), CR PC, if the accused persons made statements on oath. When choosing to grant, the High Court would have taken action to bring the verdict only. The decision was made without allowing it to come on the record, as usual errors have occurred. The trial was stopped indefinitely, with no result ever obtained by the provisions of section 555. A, the CR PC High Court was, in fact, mistaken in base its decision on wrong grounds, which was mainly due to the usual exclusion of the law which led to the error in the decision which led to the High Court decision. Was also proven guilty of prosecution. The High Court's decision to conclude unjustified was not to mention any abnormal deviation from the usual procedure prescribed by law and the use of force under section 561A, CRPC, on this account as well. Could not be kept. patent advocate from Naudero lawyer