Find a Lawyer

JAMEEL AKHTAR KIYANI versus STATE

Sections 9 (a) (iv) (V), 10, 14 (c), 15 and 32 of the Corruption Act (II of 1947), section 5 evidence was defined as Assistant Sub Inspector of Police in 1959 Joined the job and was retired in 1995 as deputy superintendent of police, alleging that he himself had been involved in corruption charges and misused his powers to obtain monetary benefits and his co-accused / In the name of his wife, he has deposited assets and properties worth Rs 9000 million in his name. And the two children were also built bungalows after the accused spent huge sums. The facts related to the prosecution, including the purchase of the property mentioned in the allegations in their names, the accused had no source of income. He did not buy the minor heirs' property and his salary. The properties obtained by the accused were disproportionate to his known source of income. d Components were established then the crime of corruption and corruption described under Section 9 (a) (v) of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 was completed, unless the accused could reasonably account for the resources from which Properties provided under section 14 (). c) National Accountability Ordinance, 1999 and the accused cannot calculate it even if the declaration of assets filed by the accused has been accepted, the amount spent on the construction of the bungalows, in total income and annually. Was much more than the savings shown by the accused. The declaration of assets to be disproportionate to the known sources of income from the assets held by the accused, was a crime prevented by a corrupt how to become a advocate from Khanbel lawyer