Find a Lawyer

GHULAM MURTAZA versus STATE

Section 9 (a) (b) and (c) of the High Court, after considering the issue of punishment from diverse angles, including legal, social and economic perspectives, approve common and standard sentences for different quantities of diversion and Recommends In connection with the control of the Narcotic Substances Act 1997, the prohibited drugs were recovered and charts and rules were provided for them.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009

• MUHAMMAD SHAFQAT v. SHAHNAZ BIBI 2009 PLD 359
• ZARINA BEGUM v. SECRETARY EDUCATION 2009 PLC(CS) 359
• SHAMRAIZ AKHTAR alias SHAMMA v. State 2009 PCrLJ 361
• PETROSIN v. FAYSAL BANK 2009 CLD 361
• NAZIR AHMED NASIR v. STATE LIFE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN 2009 PLC(CS) 362
• ABDUL JABBAR v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE 2009 CLC 364
• INAM ULLAH BAIG v. MUHAMMAD SHARIF 2009 YLR 365
• MUHAMMAD AWAIS v. State 2009 MLD 366

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2009 →

advocates from Sehar Baqlas lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes