Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SOHANRA versus STATE

Section 497 Conventional Code (XLV of 1860), Section 380/411 Theft bail, the grant of all the accomplices charged with similar charges, had already been granted bail by the trial court and the role of the accused was theirs Was not distinguished by any means. Just to deny the conviction of an accused that he has been involved in many criminal cases and having a history sheet, he will not be justified as long as the accused is brought to court. Punishment is not punished, relief should not be denied as the case of the accused was the same as that of the co-accused, who has already been granted bail. The suspect was admitted to bail, under circumstances \ r \ n \ r. n

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010

• GHULAM RAZA SAJID v. STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN 2010 CLD 792
• MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE SAHIWAL NOW TEHSIL MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION, SAHIWAL v. Hafiz MUHAMMAD SADIQ 2010 YLR 793
• NISAR alias SHADA v. MUHAMMAD SAEED SAFDAR 2010 CLC 794
• RIYASAT ALI v. State 2010 PCrLJ 795
• ABDUL RASHEED v. JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, MIAN CHANNU 2010 CLC 797
• LAHORE STOCK EXCHANGE LTD. through Managing Director v. HASSAN ASSOCIATES through Managing Partner 2010 MLD 800
• Rana SAEED AHMED v. NASIR AHMAD 2010 CLC 801
• MUHAMMAD SALEEM AKHTAR v. State 2010 PCrLJ 803

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2010 →

attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Dandot lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes