Find a Lawyer

MST. HURRIYA NAVEED versus STATE

Although the defendant's grant was designated in the FIR, section 497 of the Criminal Procedure Code (XLV of 1860), Articles 365 and 365 Abduction Guarantees, but because of fair sex, his case was subject to the provisions of section 497 Yes, the PCP was the suspect. The thoroughfare and extent of the investigation was complete. And there was no need for further investigation; the facts and circumstances of the case, the first party, agreed to bail the court;

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011

• MUHAMMAD IJAZ v. State 2011 YLR 1287
• MUHAMMAD AKHTAR v. DIRECTOR-GENERAL ANTI-CORRUPTION 2011 PCrLJ 1289
• MUHAMMAD ANWAR v. DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER GUJRANWALA 2011 MLD 1289
• SAIGOL QINGQI MOTORS LTD. v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN 2011 PTD 1290
• ASGHAR ALI v. Mst. AMTAL BIBI 2011 CLC 1292
• MANZOOR-UL-HASSAN v. CHIEF ADMINISTRATOR AUQAF 2011 PLC(CS) 1292
• RIAZ HUSSAIN v. GOVERNMENT OF PUNJAB, through Chief Secretary 2011 YLR 1299
• MUHAMMAD BASHIR CHEEMA v. GUL ZAMAN QURESHI 2011 MLD 1300

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2011 →

immigration advocates contact from Nowshera Cantt lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes