Find a Lawyer

NOOR MUHAMMAD versus STATE

Sections 200, 202, 203, 204 and 439 of the Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), section 302/109 proceeding to modify the jurisdiction of High Court Scope on a private complaint on a temporary review of the contents of the trial court, The trial proceedings against the accused persons were stayed before the High Court, after a detailed examination of the evidence, the High Court rejected the scope of the trial court, dismissing the complaint. The trial court ruled that the order passed by Plaintiff was rejected, meaning that the Supreme Court could not enter the amended jurisdiction. In the detailed scrutiny of the evidence, the High Court took note of the detailed arguments presented by the parties to conclude that such evidence was produced by the High Court within minutes on the basis of appreciating the material on the record. Because the evidence was legally recorded in the hearing of a case, as well as the arguments for reaching such a conclusion by discussing the material in the debate itself discussed in court, the affidavit as a decision of the case Delivery, which was in its final stages, determines the accused's guilt or innocence over the quality of the evidence being examined. Whether the prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and whether the accused should be acquitted, such examination of the evidence should be done in Sections 200, 202, 203 and 204 of the Court. The PC was outside the scope of the proceedings after seeing the complaints, rather than correcting any wrongdoing or irregularities committed by the courts under the High Court. Below, the Edit Scope famous high court advocate from Zahir Pir lawyer