Find a Lawyer

ASHIQ versus STATE

Section 7 33 AA (vi) and 7 337 n The definition of evidence was not in the record to indicate that the applicant had any validity or precedent for being a former offender, habitual or hard, frustrated or dangerous offender. And under this provision of the provisions (section 337N, PPC 2), the applicant cannot be sentenced to imprisonment as the aggravating incident in this case took place almost thirteen years ago and the applicant suffered and suffered. Was facing an appeal and a present review request was made. Throughout this period he was repeatedly out of jail and was sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment after partially convicting the applicant of a revision request under section 337F (vi), Which was kept separately. n

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009

• MUHAMMAD HANIF v. State 2009 PCrLJ 917
• MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE v. MUHAMMAD BOOTA 2009 MLD 917
• MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LTD. Through VP, SAMG v. HIRRA FAROOQ LTD. 2009 CLD 922
• PEER BAKHSH alias BAGGA v. State 2009 PCrLJ 925
• MUHAMMAD MUNEER v. MEMBER BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE 2009 MLD 930
• Hafiz MUHAMMAD IQBAL v. State 2009 PCrLJ 934
• MUHAMMAD AZMAT v. State 2009 MLD 940
• M. HASSA N v. GHULAM RASOOL 2009 PCrLJ 940

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2009 →

criminal advocate from Gohar Ghoushti lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes