Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AKBAR versus STATE

The prosecution's version of the prosecution was completely blasphemed by section 426 of the Conduct Code (XLV of 1860), section 302 (b), while for the purpose of trial and sentencing, the defense version through trial Was accepted, the defendant's statement was to be fully obeyed and the invalid part of the statement could not be read in isolation, except in the excused part of the statement, when the trial court believed that it was dark at night. I was dead. When it was found to be in questionable position with the conviction and conviction of the accused under Section 230b (b) / under 34, the PPC wanted bail was granted by the High Court and the accused's case was shared. Was equal to the accused. The conviction and sentence awarded to the accused were suspended

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009

• Malik MUHAMMAD AFZAL v. MANAGER AUQAF (MALIK GHULAM HYDER) BAHAWALPUR 2009 YLR 1662
• PAKISTAN INDUSTRIAL LEASING CORPORATION v. SUNRISE TEXTILE MILLS 2009 CLD 1662
• PAKISTAN OIL FIELDS v. CUSTOMS CENTRAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ISLAMABAD 2009 PTD 1664
• STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN through Chairman v. RAZI -UR-REHMAN 2009 CLD 1666
• TAUNSA GYPSUM (PVT.) LTD v. HABIB BANK LTD. 2009 CLD 1671
• SAMRA ZAMAN v. STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION GHULAM MUHAMMAD ABAD, FAISALABAD 2009 YLR 1678
• Padri SHAREEF ALAM v. State 2009 YLR 1679
• ZUBAIR AHMAD KHAN v. State 2009 YLR 1682

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2009 →

immigration advocate from Kandhkot lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes