Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE AND OTHERS versus KARAMAT HUSSAIN

Section 302 West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), Section 13 Rules of Azad Jammu and Kashmir Supreme Court, 1978, O XIII, R 3 (1) (i) (ii) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974) ), The respondent / accused of holding Section 42 Supreme Court, who was convicted by the trial court and sentenced, took the trial court's decision by appeal before the Shariah Court. The appellant / complainant filed a motion before the Shariah Court to increase the sentence of the accused, both cases were strengthened by the Shariat Court with the memorandum from the Supreme Court against the complainant / appellant. Appeals were filed by the complainant / complainant but they only filed a copy of the grounds of appeal filed by the accused / defendant, thereby memorializing the grounds for revision appeal, he added Taken that the objection was raised by the office and the appeal filed by the appellant was not Was found. The rules of the Supreme Court were formulated in such a way that in the absence of copies of all such records, the Court would not consider itself capable of deciding the appeal for leave or appeal for leave, in the circumstances before it Delivery was essential. Through trial, the court legally challenged the conviction before the Shariah Court for the application of the court's mind to adjudicate the defendant / defendant against a consequential dispute and against it. That, while the aggravating / appellant feels such order before him, the amendment was also filed to increase the sentence, which Pakistan, top advocate family court from Jandanwala lawyer