ABU SALEH versus LEARNED IIND CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE, BADIN
Sections 3 523 and 505050 Vehicle suspected to be stolen The applicant for supply of the vehicle claimed to be the owner of the confiscated property that his vehicle was seized by the police under Section 50 Section50, the petition The PC Counselor for the petitioner stated that the application was made under Section 232323. The CCP for immediate release of the vehicle; and actually the proper registration documents, which the applicant had, were shown to the magistrate. That the magistrate, instead of considering it, dismissed the request that the Department of Excise and Taxation had obtained proper certification, awaiting the Deputy Prosecutor General to confirm that in the appropriate course, the applicant must verify the vehicle's original Was the owner. The affected order was set aside and the applicant was instructed to appear before the Magistrate Lieutenant Case. Police are unable to explain the reasons why they suspect the vehicle was stolen or any crime. I am involved in the commission. And the magistrate was already convinced that the vehicle was not involved in any crime, considering the original registration book. Or had stolen property. And as it relates to the applicant, he will, under Section 23 Section CRPC, give the applicant the appropriate order for interim release of the vehicle, which is awaiting final confirmation from the Excise and Taxation Department.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011
