MALIK MUHAMMAD SHOAIB BHUTTA versus ABDUL AZIZ MOHMAND
Respondent in section 198 and 439 withholding rule (XLV of 1860), section 499/500/501/502/502A Respondent filed a complaint against the applicant as a resident manager of a group of newspapers. Was that he had posted the content through it. The newspaper defamed the Group of NewsPapers of the companies, with its news channel, as well as its CEO, after the trial court recorded conclusive evidence headed by the complainant, indicting the accused in section 499/500/501/502/502 A, Requested under PPC Trial 265 K, The application filed by the accused under CRPC was dismissed by trial. Under the non-hearing order, the main idea of the accused was that since the complainant was not the affected person as stated in section 198, CR PC, the complaint was not maintainable. It was demanded that in order to prosecute the offense of defamation, the victim by person must have filed a complaint not only by an individual but also by the body or an associate. Ion, a company and even a crime of infamy can be against a person, a jurist or a person whose words were not punished in Pakistan - punctuation in Pakistan, but according to its literal dictionary, a raging person is what it means. Is. The legal complaint was attacked by a fact-finding process and the circumstances of the case will be considered so that if a person complains about the complaint filed along with the contents of his complaint, The trial court, in many words, was particularly furious that because of the defamatory material posted by the accused, it was not only said that the Group of New
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
