Find a Lawyer

HABIBULLAH versus STATE

Section 2, 3, 4, 5, 5A, 8 and 9 Criminal Code of Conduct (v. 1898), Sections 561A, 249A and 154 Termination of Order and Procedure Both courts not only ignored the legal aspects and the proposal. Results were recovered. Those involved in the case, but he also made his orders based on a misconception, observing that the evidence was recorded without appreciating the mandatory legal position involved in the case. The alleged offense committed under Sections 5 and 5A of the 1978 Gambling Ordinance was a serious offense and could not be filed by the police in the proposed FIR form under the failure of both the courts of Section 154, CCP. To assign results and observations, confine yourself only to the effect that the evidence was recorded, all the purposes of Section 249A suffered disappointment, from CCP applicants to a club. Arrested as a registered body under the Society Registration Act 1860 and run by the elected. The organization of the members, which was licensed by the authorized authority to pay the required fees / tax, was the place where the alleged raid was a private place and it was necessary to obtain a search warrant from the area magistrate before entering. Should be done. , But this was not done, the Gambling Ordinance was violated in Sindh Sections 8 and 9 of 1978, even in the case of any warning was already issued before the registration of the case, if by any means It was reported that the club was allegedly gambling and / or being used as a gambling house object of Section 555A, CR PC under which the heirs property advocates from Kurram lawyer