Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SHAHID versus STATE

Section 498 Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Sections 337A (i), 337A (ii) and 34 bail, were awarded to the prosecutor's witness with the responsibility of injuring three, and it is not understandable. Was. None of the offenders, including the present applicants, had suffered any injury to the accused in which the alleged applicant and his accomplices had committed a crime, namely Section 77A (i), P. The offense under the PC is, while other offenses under section 77AA (ii), PPC was non-bailable and in the present case it was not possible to explain that it was not possible to explain to the present applicants. Including who was responsible for the commission of the surety offense and who was among them. The culprits were charged under ordinary and collective terms in the FIR and no culprit was liable for any specific injury, against the applicants and their accomplices. And it was inappropriate to determine to some extent whether the current applicants were responsible for the commission of a guaranteed crime or the non-bailable crime section 34, PPC filed in the FIR Did not make such a demand. Appeal of applicants to be extended for the purpose of granting bail. The High Court accepted the applicant's request and the applicant has already been granted interim pre-arrest bail confirmation by fresh security and fresh bailiffs' offer. Conditional law firms from Samma Satta lawyer