IMAM SHAH, ADVOCATE versus MUHAMMAD JAMSHED KUNDI, JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, LAKIMARWAT
Sections 167 and 561 of the Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), the cancellation of section 380/457 order, to the magistrate in the custody of the police on the basis that the material on record does not indicate that the stolen rifle accused And the complainant did not have one. In the initial report, the FIR was charged with the crime. In the preliminary report, the FIR does not require detailed documentation; the investigating officer sought remand for the accused to investigate and recover the stolen chaos. 'S request should have been accepted by the magistrate. Worked under the influence of the Sessions Judge, whose conduct could not be accorded with the dignity and decorum of the courts, which are safe places for the protection of the rights and freedoms of the people and not to prevent and prevent them. Of these, the High Court reversed the magistrate's order and, with observation, accepted the police's request for a three-day remand. To address the complainant's fears, further remand by the police will be made by law to a senior civil judge.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
