Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

MIRMAT KHAN versus STATE


Section 540 Prohibition (Enforcement) Order (4 of 1979), Arts 3 and 4 of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), Section 9 (c) Request for re-examination of witnesses, Prosecution of two witnesses After investigation, the case was closed and the case was decided for the statement of the accused under Section 2342, during which the CCPC Petitioner / Accused filed an application because his former lawyer had properly examined both witnesses. Did not, so they may be called again for re-examination. After the application of the new lawyer, PCCAD, under section application4040, the applicant filed a review request, the Adjustment Petitioner failed to state that both the prosecution's witnesses should be re-summoned for further cross-examination. Was necessary to meet the end. There is no scope for the trial court to accept such a request; in the circumstances the applicant's application was rightly rejected.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
advocates from Mithi lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.