Sections 409, 420 and 494 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (Second of 1947), Section 5 (2) of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts 185 (3), 9 and 10 (i) were convicted by the trial court. And sentenced them. Accusing the management of issuing a bank guarantee worth Rs 60 million, unofficially supporting PSO, which is subject to legal norms and requirements against inappropriate security measures, therefore, the PSO is being dishonored. Be prepared to provide the above amount on the basis of bank guarantee mentioned above. There was a compromise between the parties and the outstanding balance allegedly paid by the guarantor was paid to the PSO and the resulting bank guarantee backed by the bank in favor of the PSO was a controversial bank guarantee. Was, therefore, properly dismissed and the defendant's claim against the bank and the guarantor was settled accordingly and no damages were caused to the bank or any other person as a result of the guarantee. When referring to the trial of the accused in absentia, the record did not show that the ordinance of the banks (special courts) In 1984, the requirements for justifying the use of force under section 5 (4) were satisfied and efforts were made to affect the services of the accused, who were in the relevant time in the absence of action, hence, natural justice. In addition to violating the principles of the law, its utility has been lost, according to which the accused was never confronted with the admission of Maxim Audi Ultram Partem and the constitution of Art 9 and 10 (i). The trial, as it could not be traced, has the board (NRO) involved in its decision.
