Find a Lawyer

KASHIF KHAN versus STATE

Section 497 of the Conduct Rule (XLV of 1860), Section 489F guarantee, approval of the transaction between the accused and the complainant is related to the business, the offense against the accused was not found in the prohibited clause of section 497 (1), c. The accused was behind bars for the past fourteen months without any progress in hearing these cases; before being proven guilty, the accused could be imprisoned, which was not valid under the jurisdiction of the courts. Bail was granted where the business transaction was acknowledged. Similar cases were not enough to revoke his conviction without showing any offense against the accused.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009

• ARSHAD ALI v. Rana MUHAMMAD ANWAR 2009 MLD 1410
• NAZAR ABBAS v. State 2009 YLR 1412
• STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN through Chairman v. Mst. NASEEM BEGUM 2009 CLD 1413
• D.H.A. ESTATE AGENTS ASSOCIATION (REGISTERED) through President v. PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION AUTHORITY through Chairman 2009 CLC 1415
• ABDUL HAMEED v. PUNJAB BAR COUNCIL through Chairman 2009 YLR 1419
• MASJID AHL-E-HADEES through President and General Secretary v. Mst. KARAM NOOR 2009 CLC 1421
• LIAQUAT v. State 2009 YLR 1421
• ARSHAD HUSSAIN ABBASI v. State 2009 MLD 1422

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2009 →

famous high court advocate from Utror lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes