Find a Lawyer

ABDULLAH ALIAS SARDAR versus STATE

Section 497 Prohibition Rule (XLV of 1860), Section 392/34 Dacoity Guarantee, Complainant's Grant in Trial, was a Bidful Witness of Robbery Motorcycle It should be submitted for identification by the suspect after his arrest. That was precisely what the lawyer in the case had requested that the accused's health deteriorate and that his life was in danger due to a left-handed infection that would have made his life miserable. Was because the accused was found in possession of the robbery property, the case against the accused, must best come under section 11 under11, PPC accused, circumstances I was entitled to a discount on bail

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010

• MUHAMMAD YOUSUF v. State 2010 PCrLJ 122
• SAEED NASEEM CHEEMA v. Mrs. RUKHSANA KHAN 2010 MLD 123
• INTERNATIONAL TEXTILE LIMITED through Factory Manager v. REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS GOVERNMENT OF SINDH 2010 PLC 125
• THE STATE through Assistant Advocate-General, Sindh/Ex-Officio Public Prosecutor, Sukkur v. KHALID AHMED 2010 PCrLJ 126
• SONERI BANK LTD. v. DEWAN SUGAR MILLS LTD. 2010 CLD 130
• MUHAMM4D AYUB KHAN v. Mst. SHEHLA RASHEED 2010 PLD 131
• MUHAMMAD ASLAM v. Dr. IMTIAZ ALI MUGHAL 2010 PLD 134
• RECKITT BENCKISER PAKISTAN LTD. v. ADDITIONAL REGISTRAR OF COMPANIES 2010 CLD 135

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2010 →

list of supreme court advocates from Laliah lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes