Find a Lawyer

GULAB versus STATE

Section 497 Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Section 60 L60 / 34 34 The night raid accused were strongly responsible for the crime, but no name and description was mentioned in the FIR, the statement said. I did not mention any source by the complaining party, and the statements of Cr 161 of the prosecution's witnesses regarding the involvement of the accused in the crime remained behind bars for four years without trial. Prior to the trial, the accused had the right and no one could be kept behind bars for indefinite period as the accused were sentenced. In

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2011

• Molvi MUHAMMAD YOUSIF v. State 2011 YLR 1499
• SHAZIA AKBAR v. GOVERNMENT OF SINDH, through Secretary Home Department Sindh Secretariat, Karachi 2011 PCrLJ 1501
• DILDAR v. State 2011 YLR 1509
• JAMAL UDDIN AHMED v. MUHAMMAD MAQBOOL 2011 PCrLJ 1513
• NAVEED AHMED KHAN v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Defence 2011 MLD 1521
• MUHAMMAD ISMAIL v. State 2011 YLR 1526
• UNITED BANK LIMITED v. NUSRAT TEXTILE MILLS LIMITED 2011 CLD 1530
• S. AKBAR ALI SHAH v. FEDERATION OF ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN 2011 MLD 1536

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2011 →

law websites from Goular Khel lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes