Find a Lawyer

STATE versus RANA NISAR AHMAD

Article 39 Constitution of Pakistan, Article 188 The Supreme Court verdict was filed three years after the trial of the judgment for the confiscation of the assets of the accused (from the accused) for the determination of the assets purchased from the drug money. And the plea was dismissed because these assets were not purchased through drug money through drug money and it was not proven that the Supreme Court refused to interfere with the High Court decision. Had to be vigilant and the law should be known. If the subject was the prosecutor's opinion that the offender (since deceased) had obtained the property with the drug money, he should have presented at least preliminary evidence of it immediately at the relevant time, but this did not happen and in the meantime I did not do that. The matter had come before the Supreme Court and the decision was pending. The review was rejected before the Supreme Court refused to intervene in the decision.

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2012

• HAMID HUSSAIN v. SECRETARY HEALTH, GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB 2012 SCMR 145
• MUHAMMAD ASLAM (DECEASED) v. Molvi MUHAMMAD ISHAQ (DECEASED) 2012 SCMR 147
• MASOOD AHMED BHATTI v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, M/O. Information Technology and Telecommunication 2012 SCMR 152
• DIRECTOR-GENERAL, INTELLIGENCE BUREAU, ISLAMABAD v. MUHAMMAD JAVED 2012 SCMR 165
• FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Director-General of Intelligence and Investigation FBR, Karachi v. MUHAMMAD JAMAL RIZVI 2012 SCMR 169
• TRUSTEES OF THE PORT OF KARACHI v. SAQIB SAMDANI 2012 PLC(CS) 172
• SHAHZAD TANVEER v. State 2012 SCMR 172
• Mst. KULSOOM NAZ v. Dr. ITIFAQ HUSSAIN 2012 SCMR 177

All Supreme Court judgments of 2012 →

Pakistan, top advocate family court from Mir Ali lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes