Find a Lawyer

PERVAIZ AHMED ALIAS PEEJA versus STATE

Article 302 (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) Qatil-Imr trial was murder of the accused was given effective role of firing The three ocular versions provided sufficient evidence to prove the crime of bringing the accused home. Went to The complaining party did not have any blood animosity in order to create suspicion in the witnesses' statements or to prove that the accused had been falsely implicated, suggesting that coordination between the two courts does not guarantee any interference by the Supreme Court. Used to give The leave of appeal was denied under the circumstances

Related judgments — Supreme Court, 2010

• MUHAMMAD ASGHAR alias NANNAH v. State 2010 SCMR 1706
• KHADIM HUSSAIN v. State 2010 SCMR 1720
• Mian PEER MUHAMMAD v. HAMEER SAFFAR 2010 SCMR 1725
• MUHAMMAD NADEEM v. State 2010 SCMR 1729
• ASIF AYUB v. State 2010 SCMR 1735
• NAZIR AHMED alias JEERA v. State 2010 SCMR 1741
• NASRULLAH KHAN v. State 2010 SCMR 1742
• JAVID-UR-REHMAN v. State 2010 SCMR 1744

All Supreme Court judgments of 2010 →

law firms from Qasba Gujrat lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes