Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD KABIR AHMED PIRACHA versus STATE

Before the arrest of the section 498 Preventive Code (XLV of 1860), the arrest of the section 489F, the verification of the dishonest check was not issued by the accused dishonestly nor for the repayment of the loan. Yes, but it was released to fulfill an uncertain responsibility. Under the aforementioned checks, a trade dispute between the parties was lodged on the liability side; the force of law should wait for the outcome of this trade dispute, rather than pre-arrest the accused before harassing the accused. The bail was confirmed,

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010

• Mst. ADAN MUSHTAQ v. SHAHID MAJEED 2010 YLR 3179
• Chaudhry ASGHAR SHAHEEN v. Raja MUNAWAR HUSSAIN 2010 YLR 3184
• GHULAM MURTAZA v. Rana MUHAMMAD HAFEEZ 2010 YLR 3189
• MIR DAD v. INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE, PUNJAB 2010 YLR 3201
• MUHAMMAD WALAYAT v. MEMBER JUDICIAL, BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB 2010 YLR 3211
• MUHAMMAD YOUSAF v. MUHAMMAD RAMZAN 2010 YLR 3222
• Haji MAAZULLAH KHAN v. KAIYAN HOMI KAIKOBAD 2010 YLR 3233
• ATTA MUHAMMAD v. MUHAMMAD SHARIF 2010 YLR 3242

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2010 →

top advocates from Panjan Kisan lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes