Find a Lawyer

RANA MUHAMMAD AYUB versus STATE

Section 491 (2) of the Immigration Ordinance (XVIII of 1979), Section 17 (22) bail, along with the allegations of further investigation against the accused in the FIR, as well as the statements made under Section 161, CR PC, are merely natural As the complainant was the party failed to say when the accused received the money from the complainant, how much money was received by the applicant and where the applicant received such amount, no one on record There is no documentary evidence to prove the vague and general charges leveled against the accused. The role played by the accused during the entire transaction allegedly by the alleged party was merely secondary which was played by the co-accused who had already entered into the confession of arrest warrant which was compromised. And the complaining party had nothing recovered from the possession of the accused. During the investigation of the case, the physical extent of the accused has already been finalized. Investigation of his crime against the accused under section 497, sub-section (2) of the CR PC. Detention was no longer needed for the purpose of investigation against the accused, he was admitted on bail advocate from Haroonabad lawyer