Find a Lawyer

MST. NUSRAT BIBI versus NAZIR AKHTAR

Section 13 (3) The termination of the case requires the prosecution to require the witnesses to appear before the Section 13 by the party, as a result of the failure of the witnesses to testify. ()) The failure of any witness to appear before the party for the assertion of pre-emption rights by the party of the Punjab Pre-Emission Act, 1991, will result in the failure of the student to prove the first offense. In the present case, Talha appeared in the witness house to confirm Ish Ashdad's testimony, but did not support the case of the former emperor, while another witness of Talbish Ishd was not presented by the emperor for whom Unbelievable clarification was offered before Emperor failed to produce two factual witnesses to prove the motive under section 13 (3) of the Punjab Pre-Emission Act 1991, prematurely for the United Kingdom. Was removed according to Ed

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2015

• PUNJAB EMPLOYEES\' SOCIAL SECURITY INSTITUTION, LAHORE v. M. H. CHALLENGE INDUSTRIES, SIALKOT 2015 SCMR 790
• FAZLI HAKEEM v. SECRETARY STATE AND FRONTIER REGIONS DIVISION ISLAMABAD 2015 SCMR 795
• IQBAL AHMED v. MANAGING DIRECTOR PROVINCIAL URBAN DEVELOPMENT BOARD, N.-W.F.P. PESHAWAR 2015 SCMR 799
• MUHAMMAD ARIF v. SAIMA NOREEN 2015 SCMR 804
• Syed MAHMOOD AKHTAR NAQVI v. GOVERNMENT OF SINDH 2015 SCMR 810
• Ch. AHMED NAWAZ v. PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through Land Acquisition Collector, Jhelum 2015 SCMR 823
• NASREEN BIBI v. FARRUKH SHAHZAD 2015 SCMR 825
• ADIL TIWANA v. SHAUKAT ULLAH KHAN BANGASH 2015 SCMR 828

All Supreme Court judgments of 2015 →

female advocates from Chak Sawara lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes