Find a Lawyer

UNITED BANK LIMITED THROUGH PRINCIPAL OFFICER/ATTORNEY/AREA MANAGER, MULTAN ZONE, MULTAN versus STATE

Sections 409/420/467/468/471 Corruption Prevention Act (II of 1947), Section 5 (2) Criminal Code of Conduct (V9 1898), Sections 417 (2A), 265D, 265K and 439B Against the serious allegations, the accused were charged with embezzlement of millions of rupees deposited by different persons, their details were given in the FIR, such allegations were filed against them. , The challan was then filed against the accused. Investigated, but the trial court acquitted him under section 265 of the CCPC on the basis of allegations and allegations that various witnesses had supported the prosecution's story, handwriting expert The report cannot be conclusive to prove or deny the allegations against the accused. In the presence of other pieces of evidence, crime linking it to the commission of the crime, according to the affidavit, some account holders have alleged that they do not pardon the charge. Evidence cannot be grounded for his acquittal; furthermore, the prosecutor was also denied the right to call such witnesses admissible and to investigate them, if he had in fact made his earlier statements. That they were behind. The police cannot rule out the possibility that the accused had tampered with the prosecution's evidence and thus could not be given any benefit, Section 265D, CRPC did not show that the accused was punished. Witness testimony statements can be made on affidavits. There was no scope for proceeding to the trial and therefore, considering the affidavits of Section 265, the PCP, only the witnesses were competent in this case at the time of trial. Pakistan, top advocate family court from Darya Khan lawyer