KHAIRAT HUSSAIN versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, SHEIKHUPURA
Complaints against the Settlement of Sections 3 and 7 of the Criminal Code (V 1898), Section 265K Illegal Property Acquisition The Unlawful Dispossession Act, 2005, was a special law that encouraged land grabbers Was dispatched and provided for protection. Ownership rights and legal matters, but all persons were banned under Section 3 (1) of the Section 3 (1) of the Unlawful Settlement Act 2005, section 3 (1) of section 3 of the said Act. In order to commit a detailed offense under the provisions of this law, the complaint before the trial shall not be sustained. First of all, because the court had adopted all the kodal rituals before the accused was summoned. And second, that the facts and circumstances of the case fully attracted the provisions of the Unlawful Settlement Act 2005, while filing a complaint under the Unlawful Settlement Act 2005, the complainant was only required to prove that the property was Was in legal possession when he was allegedly expelled. It is argued that the complainant was not the owner of the property, he had no weight. In the present case, there was initially sufficient material available against the applicants and in the case filed in the alleged suit, the defendant had the opportunity to prove his application through well-known evidence. Any unauthorized order inviting the High Court to interfere with the use of this amended jurisdiction by the applicants, the same land, which is related to the civil rights of the parties and cannot be barred from initiating criminal proceedings. Absence of unlawful / legal weakness of
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011
