Find a Lawyer

ALLAH BAKHSH versus MUHAMMAD KHAN

Penal Code of Sections 417 and 265 (XLV of 1860), Section 218/420/468/471/109 Before the Corruption Act (III of 1947), Section 5 (2) against the Appellant / Complainant The appellant had alleged the petition under section 265. The CRPC filed the case on behalf of the few accused, but the special court acquitted all the accused without recording any evidence, under which the complaint was dismissed, causing Was accused of conducting a corruption trial. He submitted that there was no possibility of his conviction by the trial court as there was no allegation of accepting bribe from him and the inquiry in this case was made under the order of the competent authority in which the address It was not even an inch of land. The question was snatched by any accused or complainant from the accused and on the same facts an FIR was lodged against the two persons while the complaint was lodged by the complainant. Claimed that the trial court did not commit any illegal or material misconduct by the High Court for interference. One of the accused claimed that he was summoned even though he was not present at the time of the incident. The need was raised by the relevant parties. Deep testimony of the parties' evidence which could be investigated for the facts and could not be exercised by the High Court sitting within the jurisdiction of the appeal, because the trial case was that the recording of both oral and documentary evidence. It is not possible to come to any conclusion after. Trial law firms from FR Bannu / Lakki lawyer