Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ISLAM versus S.H.O., POLICE STATION FACTORY AREA, SARGODHA

Section 505050 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitution Amendment Orders The petitioner challenged the trial court's decision by deciding that it was arbitrary and was granted under unlawful consideration of the vehicle. The original owner was liable and in the case of theft of the said vehicle, the FIR was filed on the request of the plaintiff magistrate, who, having passed the order in favor of the applicant, had forgotten the fact that the applicant was neither. Applicant's lawyer argued in his possession that the undercarriage was not owned by the vehicle nor taken into custody by the police. The car had a good buyer in question the applicant. The Additional Sessions Judge was empowered with any power, while the order of delay in the constitutional petition was not in violation of the law and the FIR was fully justified in the possession of the vehicle and the lie had rightly directed the police to take up the matter. Stay tuned. The disputed orders of the main petition were inherently mutual, as the primary dispute over the delivery of the vehicles was pending before the court when only a final order could be challenged in the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court dispute. The issue is mainly related to the contentious questions, which were not resolved in the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court applicant, who failed to identify any illegal, weak or jurisdictional error in illegal orders. Yes, the intervention of the High Court was guaranteed, the application was dismissed with the direction of the revised court to decide the matter of merit on rev r to n \ r \ n me r \ n \ r online advocate from Bisham lawyer