MALIK MUHAMMAD JAMEEL AKHTAR versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE
Article 199 Law Reform Ordinance (XII of 1972), Section 3 intra-court upholds the appeal, appellant / applicant of the constitutional petition, claiming that the respondents submitted false and false documents in connection with the LLB degree. And the matter was accepted by the Anti-Corruption Committee. The Appellant of the Provincial Bar Council did not deny that in the subsequent decision of the Provincial Bar Council's Anti-Corruption Committee, the documents were regularly considered as having been reviewed by the University's then-affirmed committee, Which was not challenged by anyone. The Supreme Court had reached the final decision to find the Anti-Corruption Committee clear, unambiguous and on the basis of evidence; there was no reason to agree with the Appellant on the basis of the authenticity of the Respondent's Result Card. There was no locus standi for filing a constitutional petition against the defendant, otherwise the victim was not an inmate and the High Court intervened in the constitutional petition of the Provincial Bar Council's Anti-Corruption Committee, which is speaking on its own. Refused, which was rightly denied, otherwise, the constitutional petition was filed against the respondents. Was not filed by someone who was not. A `sad party \ \ r \ n
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
