MUHAMMAD SALEEM BHATTI versus SYED SAFDAR ALI RIZVI
Sections 561A, 249A, 265K and 439 of the Conventional Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 406, 420, 468 and 471 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts 199 and 185 (3) of the FIR have the benefit of factual dispute alternatives. Not to be treated under Section 249A, 265K & 439, the PCF Pact Petitioner filed a constitutional petition, demanding the return of the four FIs filed against it by the High Court, Instead of resorting to a civil court, the complainant / defendant began proceedings. The criminal proceedings against the petitioner by filing an FI, the High Court suspended all four FIs, saying that the petitioner had not committed any admissible offense in the said FI, which was a misuse of law practice. Could not secure its fulfillment because of. Accuracy of Justice The High Court was to exercise jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution under certain parameters unless it was established that some facts were disputed and the High Court should not have been in a dispute of realism. ? The complainants / respondents among the parties alleged that the fraud was against the applicant. And in view of the factual dispute between the parties, it was not appropriate to terminate the FIR which was being investigated, and it was in the initial stage that the applicant sought the jurisdiction after submitting the challan or seeking his jurisdiction under Section 249. A, or 265 K, can find alternative treatments under CR PC. Jurisdiction of the High Court PC under section 9439, the court authorized under CCPC or Article 9 9 of the Constitution, appropriate remedy under Sections 249A, 265K and 439 of the PC
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
