Find a Lawyer

DEEDAR versus ABDULLAH

The trial court dismissed the request to return the complainant and the prosecution witnesses for a further cross-examination of section 540. The complainant and the prosecution were entitled to call back the witnesses. Further cross-examination was conducted by his private lawyer, after which he complained of accuracy and, at length, examined some of the prosecution's testimony by the state prosecutor. Following the appointment, two prosecution witnesses were examined, who conducted a cross-examination of them. There was no serious reason or justification for calling back the testimony of the complainant and the prosecution for further investigation as set forth before the trial court for recording of the accused's statement. Did not commit any kind of illegal or irregularity. n conditions

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013

• IMAM BUX v. State 2013 PCrLJ 1588
• SHAHRUKH JATOI v. State 2013 MLD 1588
• COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE, LTU, KARACHI v. KARACHI SHIPPING (PVT.) LTD., KARACHI 2013 PTD 1592
• KAMRAN v. State 2013 YLR 1592
• ASIF v. Mst. SANGEETA 2013 CLC 1597
• ABDUL KARIM v. State 2013 PCrLJ 1600
• Hafiz MEHBOOB v. PROVINCE OF SINDH through Secretary, Revenue Board of Revenue 2013 MLD 1602
• ABID HUSSAIN v. NAWAB 2013 YLR 1609

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2013 →

best law firms from Khurian wala lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes