Find a Lawyer

KAMRAN MASIH versus STATE

Section 497 (2) of the Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Section 392/34 Dacoity Guarantee, further investigation grantee's name was not included in the FIR and no specific role was assigned to the accused. The suspect was not involved and was clearly discharged there. There were three suspects who came to commit robbery primaries. The prosecution had no material available to link the accused to the commission of the alleged crime. And the case falls under the category of further inquiry under section 497 (2), the CCP suspect was admitted to bail, under the circumstances

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2010

• COCA COLA BEVERAGE PAKISTAN LIMITED through Authorized Officer/Industrial Relations v. REGISTRAR TRADE UNIONS SINDH 2010 PLC 48
• MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE v. CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.1 2010 YLR 49
• ABDUL GHANI v. AHMAD HIMANI 2010 YLR 50
• Mst. SHAHNAZ GHULAM RASOOL v. MUHAMMAD SHAKEEL AHMAD SIDDIQUI 2010 PLD 50
• ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Islamabad v. Mst. FARZANA SHABBIR 2010 MLD 54
• Syed MATANAT MOAZZAM BUKHARI v. Dr. ARFA SAEED 2010 CLC 58
• SHANKAR v. RANJHO 2010 YLR 61
• NASEER AHMED v. Mst. AZRAH 2010 PLD 61

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2010 →

immigration advocates email from Muzaffargarh lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes