Section 2 (d) Interpretation Code (XLV of 1860) Sections 467, 468 and 471 Ordinance of Banking Companies (LVII of 1962) Section 7 Crimes (Special Courts) in relation to Banks Ordinance 1984 Special Court (2) Interpretation of Banks) The scheduled crime, jurisdiction and jurisdiction of the banking company failed the order of the Special Court (Banks) whereby its criminal complaints against the respondents were dismissed under Section 203, CR PC. Due to these complaints do not fall within the definition of scheduled crime. In connection with the banks (Special Courts) Ordinance, the Bank of Containment in 1984 was that the defendants who sought financial assistance from the bank manipulated documents from the bank, to show that they had made their presence before the bank. The responsibility is fulfilled and it is redeemed. Their mortgaged property from the bank's charge, and the same matters were defined under the Definition of Crime under the Banks (Special Courts) Ordinance, 1984 and so on. The follower of the manipulative documents has revealed that the manipulation was done with the sole intention of preventing the bank from recovering outstanding dues and securing financing facility, which was found in PPC Special Sections 467, 468 and 471. Comes in circle. The court (the banks) misled itself by saying that such manipulation does not indicate that the accused had allegedly committed fraud or manipulation in connection with or in connection with the bank's business. Committed, and it gave the word business a very narrow meaning. The Bank's Special Court (Banks) erred in saying that its jurisdiction only extended to cases where there was some financial issue.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
