Find a Lawyer

AMIR AMAN ULLAH KHAN versus NAIYLA NAWAZ KHAN

Section 497 (2) Code of Conduct (XLV of 1860), Section 381 A & 411 Receiving stolen car and fraudulently stolen property, further investigation complainant's grant, initially the fact of registration book presence Did not mention. He specifically mentioned his National Identity Card in the car, saying that the recovery took place as a matter of further investigation. The involvement of the accused in such cases was not disclosed in the memo record. The matter needs further investigation. And for any purpose of investigation it did not require constant detention; crime against the accused did not fall under the prohibited clause of section 497; the PC accused was admitted into bail.

Related judgments — Islamabad, 2011

• GHULAM FAREED v. MUHAMMAD DIN RANA 2011 PCrLJ 1388
• Syed QAZIM ABBAS v. INTERIOR MINISTRY through Secretary 2011 CLC 1404
• Moulana ABDUL AZIZ v. State 2011 MLD 1439
• Syed ZAHIR SHAH v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Interior 2011 MLD 1451
• JAMILAPIRZADA v. Col. (R) MANSOOR AKBAR 2011 CLC 1619
• JAVED-UR-REHMAN v. State 2011 PCrLJ 1868
• LIAQAT ISLAM v. State 2011 YLR 2280
• Malik ZAHEER AHMAD v. State 2011 YLR 2294

All Islamabad judgments of 2011 →

patent advocate from Kachhi/Bolan lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes