Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD RIAZ versus STATE

Sections 9 (a) (iii) (IV), 10, 18 (g) and 24 (b) Criminal Procedure (V9 1898), Section 173 Determination of evidence, reduction of column number 2 to the challan object person in the column There was no effective charge against any bank employee, accused / appellant that the account holders used to hand over their checks and cash to the accused for the purpose of depositing their checks and cash, but the accused was deposited in the check / cash related accounts. Instead, the same National Accountability Court / Trial Court charged that the accused faces up to five years in prison and a fine. The trial court failed to define the fact that the bank's branch manager was involved in the crime but was named in the column. Although there was not enough evidence on record against him, he has no other challan and this act has led the accused to injustice and prejudice. The investigation was not conducted honestly and the original culprits, who were found guilty in bank inquiries and consequently dismissed for employment, were excluded for no reason. The affected account holders did not have a deposit receipt slip for the illegal amount. The handwriting expert's accuracy report confirmed that most of the checks were deposited by the account holders, who were exposed, the bank signatures of the accused bank manager were placed in column number 2 of the challan, But it was not known why it was placed in column number 2 when it was specifically stated in the challan that both the bank manager and the accused had been robbed of money. Under the law, only those accused were to be kept in column number 2. Against was not enough. Proof record attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Kashmir lawyer