Find a Lawyer

MALIK MUHAMMAD ANWAR versus MST. SALEEMA

Late grandfather's right to take part in Section 302 (b), 307a and 308 ditto amount of money The father had murdered his minor daughter almost four years and was found guilty under section 302 (b). The conviction was changed to the crime of the accused, Section 8308, PPC and he was sentenced to twelve years RI and he was also directed to pay the dues to the deceased's heirs, besides the accused's brother. The father of the accused, who deposited the money by the accused, presented the case to the court. He was entitled to the payment of the money to the extent of 2/3 of the share according to which he was entitled to the deceased's accused / father to pay the dues to the deceased's legal heirs, especially to the accused. Get the share of the money paid off, which would mean that the money was paid to the other existing legal heirs and since the deceased's mother remained the sole legal heir in the absence of the deceased's father, he would be the accused's father The father was entitled to receive the entire amount, otherwise the deceased's father was not usually entitled to the deceased's inheritance, excluding the deceased's grandfather from inheritance killing. No one individual is entitled to a claim or its source. Or to succeed in the property of the victims in view of the principles of justice, equity and good conscience, Section 7 307A, PPC was applied only to injury cases and not to the murderer's grandparents who killed their murdered son. The source was the claimant. Do not deserve the money, because in the absence of his son, he can succeed in 2/3 of the stake, while his killer son was alive because he was not sentenced to death, top advocate from Mubarik Pur lawyer