Section 417, 249A & 439A Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 337A (II) / 337L (2) / 34 before the approval of the injunction to be acquitted by Shuja i Madiah and other offenders After granting the opportunity for a hearing to the appeal and review request to Section 249A, CCPC, the accused and the prosecutor, the trial magistrate was obliged to apply his proper mind to important components, ie. From the time he was recorded, he understood that the allegation was baseless or unlikely. For this purpose, the accused is being convicted of a crime. He was obliged to examine the material available on the record. The verdict of the trial of Breath showed that the verdict in favor of the accused was granted only because the defendant was unable to produce any evidence which was the reason for the delay in presenting the evidence by the prosecution, There was no scope for a request from the authority under Section 249A, CRPC under the IPSO and that alone could not be a reasonable basis for acquittal of the accused. r Section 249A, CRC's impugned order did not disclose that the prosecutor was given an opportunity to be heard The anonymous ruling also failed to state that the allegation was baseless. Or there was no possibility of the accused being found guilty in any crime record, it was also revealed that from 18 2 2011 to 18 7 2011, the trial court ordered the witnesses to be summoned by their non-bailable and non-bailable warrant arrests. Was heard by the trial court. The interim orders failed to record the outcome of an arrest warrant for any witnesses at the hearing;
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
