Section 3 Criminal Procedure Code (V9 1898), section 417, dismissed the appeal against the respondent's complaint filed by the appellant against the respondent, stating that there was no direct evidence on the record record. In order to show that the defendant, who was the tenant under the appellant complaining about the acquired land, the complainant was justified, under civil litigation between the parties from civil court to court supreme. All the courts had litigated that it was in the possession of the accused. The land in the dispute was illegal and before the occupation of the land was handed over to the complainant, but the re-occupation of the land by the accused as an unlawful occupation equates to unlawful possession of the property. On which there is no meritorious complaint through oral evidence. Of the ten witnesses and the aforementioned verdicts contained in his complaint, the ground's expulsion from the land was fully proven by the trial court, as well as on the evidence and material available on record, along with the decisions of the courts of law. Had not even considered, which was a misappropriation of evidence and a lack of evidence, and it was an illegal and irregularity that led to the controversial decision to dismiss. Was convicted under Section 3 of the Unlawful Settlement Act, 2005, and RI was sentenced to a fine of Rs. 10,000 a year, or to extend section II to three months for the penalty of fine. Was found, in which case the police authorities were directed to present the complainant within a week
Related judgments — Quetta High Court Balochistan, 2010
