Find a Lawyer

SARWAR KHAN ALIAS LALA versus STATE

The complainant did not disclose the source of the 498 (2) Contempt Rule (XLV of 1860), Section 302 Murder M Bail, Further Investigation Grant, by which he found out about the incident to the witnesses No explanation was provided for not being aware. The complainant about the incident did not report to the post-mortem inspection despite the fact that he was a resident of the same village Wajitkar. Otherwise, the evidence of Wajitkar was a weak crime that could easily be prosecuted. ? Demanding further investigation of the accused's own crime within the scope of section 497 (2)

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015

• MUHAMMAD SOHAIL SARWAR v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KHANEWAL 2015 MLD 905
• Miss ASMA JAVAID v. GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB through Secretary, Health Department 2015 CLC 907
• MCB BANK LTD. v. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER INLAND REVENUE 2015 PTD 911
• SAEED AHMED SHERAZI v. GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB 2015 PLC(CS) 915
• SHAUKAT ALI v. Mst. HALEEMA BIBI 2015 YLR 922
• MAQSOOD YAMEEN v. R.P.O. MULTAN 2015 PCrLJ 923
• MUHAMMAD BASHIR v. State 2015 YLR 932
• MUHAMMAD ASLAM v. NATIONAL BANK OF PAKISTAN 2015 CLD 933

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2015 →

list of supreme court advocates from Pannu aqil lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes