Find a Lawyer

RAHIM BUX versus STATE

In section 2 (2 (b) and 404) morning, the defendants' testimony on the definition of evidence of dishonest use of the deceased's property had no power to defend itself, as such application was not proven on record. Although he was arrested in a critical condition, he did not explain his injury in his statement under Section 342, CR PC, especially though the prosecution's evidence in this case was natural, credible and reliable. Had an impressive sentence and the conviction was upheld

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010

• HABIBULLAH alias HABAN v. State 2010 PCrLJ 1917
• MUHAMMAD ALI v. ABDUL HAQ 2010 MLD 1920
• Syed NASIR ALI v. PAKISTAN through Secretary Ministry of Law, Islamabad 2010 PTD 1924
• QASIM KHAN v. PROVINCE OF SINDH 2010 YLR 1928
• DARAYUS CYRUS MINWALA v. NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY BUREAU through its Chairman 2010 MLD 1931
• ALLAHYAR v. JIAND 2010 CLC 1931
• MUHAMMAD FAYAZ v. State 2010 YLR 1934
• TAMEEZUDDIN v. State 2010 PCrLJ 1937

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2010 →

list of advocates from Alipur lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes