HAJI JAMIL HUSSAIN versus ILLAQA MAGISTRATE SECTION 30, MULTAN
Sections 395 and 412 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (V9 1898), sections 200 and 204 of the robbery and fraudulently stolen robbery after receiving stolen property from the commission, submitted a cancellation report to the magistrate, who canceled it. Agreed to the complaint. The investigative process, due to dissatisfaction with the police process, filed a private complaint, in which the same magistrate filed preliminary evidence, but the unknown order was dismissed by the magistrate while the private complaint was dismissed. That the witnesses have confirmed the existence. The private complaint was dismissed, based on the incident, but upon the order of his cancellation notice. The legitimate purpose of the private complaint was to make the object transparent and satisfying; while dealing with the private complaint, after recording brief evidence, the court was not expected to review the matter for a moment. The content was deeply evaluated, but it was to determine whether a first case was presented to proceed with the issue in order to proceed with the trial, after recording the brief evidence. Submit the evidence to the complainant and decide if there is sufficient scope for action. Whether or not it exists and at this stage it was not necessary for the complainant to prove his case beyond any doubt during the trial, as listed in Section 204, the CRC required conditions. Was the facts known to his presence and the satisfaction of the court to ascertain the facts before him, proceedings under Section 204, CR P.C.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2012
