Find a Lawyer

IMRAN-UL-HAQ HASSAN SAEED versus STATE

Section 497 Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Sections 420, 468, 471 and 409 of the Prevention of Corruption Act (III of 1947), Section 5 bail, the defendant's grant, a bank employee claimed that physical remarks obtained by police. During, there was nothing. It was recovered. That the department inquiry has been done and the competent authority recommended that it be reinstated. That during the investigation, the accused was found only guilty of negligence. That the prosecution against them was not armed with any direct evidence. That there was no allegation of misconduct or embezzlement in any way. That he was not assigned the role of cash handling as a duty roster, and the only role assigned to him was to deal with all kinds of debt / financial issues, prepare all kinds of balance balance books and computers. The operation was. That he had signed two vouchers in the usual case, the first accused offered to offer security or mortgage in favor of the bank in order to pay compensation by the Registrar against him in awarding the award against him. Ready to execute the post of The bank placed the Deputy Prosecutor General in a pending motion, though he opposed the request for bail on the merit, but did not oppose the offer of a dispute raised by the accused, in the specific circumstances of the case. Bail bail was worth hearing. The condition is that either the accused or any real estate mortgagee on his behalf, whose value is not less than Rs. 700,000, is to secure the ultimate interest of the bank in favor of the bank. divorce advocates from FR Kohat lawyer