Sections 498 and 497 (2) of the Code of Conduct (XLV of 1860), Sections 420/468/471 pre-arrest bail, further inquiry confirming that the accused was the employee of the co-accused only and the accused along with the co-accused identified the site Was imposed. It was later allegedly bought by the complainant, himself charged, as the complainant's own version revealed that the disputed plots that were sold to the complainant were transferred to his relatives by the co-accused. So far, until the second agreement between the complainant and the co-accused was concerned, the accused was merely a witness to the entire record and the evidence submitted by the prosecution, it has not been mentioned anywhere that the accused has ever been charged with the plot. No money was found and a fake document was prepared in connection with the controversial plots. Required not required for trial and investigation purpose The accused was also not profitable in the transaction between the co-accused and the complainant Only the co-accused HaDi received the money and allegedly cheated the complainant Prima Fax, the accused further investigation. Was successful in presenting the case, the accused's pre-arrest bail was granted, under the circumstances \ r \ n
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
