AZIZULLAH KHAN versus S.H.O. POLICE STATION SADAR, MIANWALI
Under Section 324, PPC under the preliminary FIR of the Public Prosecutor in the case of section 9 of the Contempt Rule (XLV of 1860), Section 324/34 Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Investigation of the General Contempt of Commonwealth and the Intentional Petition The case was registered, but is under investigation. During the investigation, the officer stated that the offenses had been committed under sections 337F (V), 337A (I), 337L (2) and 337H (2) and The offense was dismissed under section 324, PPC, when the challan of the case was presented to the public. The prosecutor, for investigative purposes, observed that a first understanding of the facts and circumstances of the case was made under Section 324, PPC, and remarked that the offense under Section 324, PPC Petitioner / accused. There is no ground available for the investigating officer to delete. Public prosecutor's powers and litigation were challenged and the duties of the prosecutor were provided under section 9 of the Punjab Criminal Service (Constitution, Functions A). Under the provisions of the ND Powers Act, 2006 and section 9 (5) (a) of the said Act, the prosecutor is required to investigate the report and return the officer-in-charge of the police station or Investigation Officer within three days. Granted, if he finds it defective, the remedy for such defects as it will point out was that the challan of this case had already been presented in the trial court and at that stage the prosecutor's office The charge of remarks had already been presented, it was not an instruction in itself, but rather an observation and in the light of the earlier registration of the case under Section 242424, PPC, on this case There was no content. Nor is this section 32424, p
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2013
