Sections 22 (b) and 24 (6) of the accused are accused of receiving money from a person for the purpose of rendering foreign employment through a contract that he pledged to send the complainant abroad through a contract. And if he did so, according to the complainant, the accused received Rs. 1,17,000 from him but he failed to fulfill his promise, the complainant had paid 3,34,000 as per the terms of the contract. Rupees summoned but a preliminary inquiry into the accused's refusal to pay the aforementioned recommendation to register a case against the accused Assistant Director FIA Conf. Under Section 24 (6), the complainant was called upon to submit, there was no previous background of enmity between the parties and there was no question of even being trapped. Established that there was an office to send the accused abroad. The conviction and conviction of the accused depended on the recording, in these circumstances the appropriate sentence was pronounced and the sentence was pronounced.
Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2011
