Find a Lawyer

KHAWAJA NASEER AHMED versus STATE

Upon final evidence on the main allegations under section 10 of the National Accountability Ordinance, 1999, a constitutional request for the examination of Article 10 and 31 Pakistan Constitution (XVIII of 1999), Article 10 and 31 of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 The prosecutor moved the application under section 3540. , CRPC asked to examine five witnesses to prove the allegation under Section A31A, the Ordinance Seed application has been allowed to be granted under an unreasonable order, the applicant in his constitutional application has made the order section 4040. , Prayed for the CRP to be set aside, which was attractive at any stage of the process. , Was divided into two parts, the first part was arbitrary and the second was mandatory if the trial court found that the evidence of a witness was necessary for a fair decision of the case, the trial court should call the witness in the present testimony. Was bound by Prosecutor wanted to examine five witnesses who said that the record of witnesses was to be proved under Section 31A of the National Accountability Ordinance, the statement of four of the five witnesses from 1999 certainly helped the trial court to conclude. Whether the allegation was proved or otherwise stated that the evidence of four witnesses is necessary for a fair decision in the case. The trial court was bound to examine the witnesses under the circumstances, and it could not be that the prosecution in the case sought to find fault, there was no illegal or irregularity in connection with the examination of the witnesses who were unknown. , Except for the Fifth Witness Examination, which did not require proof, the impend order was upheld how to become a advocate from Malakand lawyer