Find a Lawyer

AHMAD YAR versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER, SHAH KOT, DISTRICT SAHIWAL

Respondent during the registration of a single judge of Article 199 Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Section 302 Criminal Procedure Code (V9 1898), Section 154 Law Reform Ordinance (XII of 1972), Section 3 Second FIR Intra Court of Appeals Accept the Constitutional request of Alias. Section H was instructed to file a second FIR on the defendant's statement and proceed according to law. There was no judicial error in the order of Saeed, there was no restriction on the registration of the second FIR on the different versions given by the affected party. In the second FIR, however, the first version of the respondents would not contain facts for mere detention; it was the case that the appellant had assassinated him along with six respondents in order to seize the property of the deceased. According to the first FIR, filed by the appellant, the fact that the deceased was killed by the six respondents can only be determined during the course of the investigation and not to some extent by the Intra Court of Appeal to the appellant. The Navigation Officer will have the opportunity to pick up all his petitions, which can either leave the appellant or call for cancellation of the case. The Court shall, if he is found guilty during the investigation concerns the delay in court. Ten days later, the respondent may also consider the inquiry officer or the trial court intra-court appeal under the terms of Section 3 (1) of the Law Reform Ordinance 1972, which does not hold against the High Court's single judge's order. Was. In the constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution, the intra-court appeal was dismissed in the circumstances famous supreme court advocate from Pindi gheb lawyer