Find a Lawyer

SULEMAN JALIL versus STATE

Section 498 Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Section 489F dishonestly issue arrest warrants, confirm the date of issue of the check and contradict further investigations in relation to the detention of the accused behind bars; But there was no reconciliation during the argument. The record case, under these circumstances, seemed to be a further investigation, saying that it also shows that Malala's factor could not be excluded in the case if the accused's arrest warrant was approved.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010

• SHER SHAH v. Mst. RANI BEGUM 2010 YLR 308
• Mst. RAHMAT v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE-II, MUZAFFARGARH 2010 PLD 308
• ALI SHER v. State 2010 MLD 308
• MUHAMMAD DAWOOD KHAN v. DISTRICT COORDINATION OFFICER, MIANWALI 2010 PLC(CS) 310
• SAJID MAHDI v. NAZIR AHMED 2010 PLD 312
• SAJJAD AHMAD v. KHAN BROTHERS FLYING COACH SERVICE, MAILSI through Proprietor 2010 CLC 313
• FIDA HUSSAIN v. State 2010 MLD 313
• Mst. RAHEELA SALAMAT v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, FAISALABAD 2010 YLR 314

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2010 →

property advocates from Quetta lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes