Find a Lawyer

NASEEM FAROOQ NIAZI versus STATE

Prior to the arrest of Section 498 Defamation Code (XLV of 1860), Section 489F, it was claimed before the accused's lawyer's confirmation that the recovery case was also registered under summary section against the accused, which included some deviations. Were presented. The facts that led up to the issuance of the check were based on the fact that a commercial dispute cannot be made a criminal prosecution. The complainant's lawyer said the dispute check was issued by the suspects after some trade transactions between the parties. Variation of the facts stated in the FIR and the facts stated in the case in respect of the same matter, the pre-arrest warrant for the accused was already confirmed on the same terms and conditions.

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009

• Mst. HASEENA BEGUM v. SALAM JAWED 2009 YLR 2158
• SHAHZAD HUSSAIN v. State 2009 YLR 2162
• SHAHZAD v. Mst. KULSOOM 2009 YLR 2166
• KHADIM HUSSAIN v. State 2009 YLR 2175
• Mst. NURULSUBAH 2009 YLR 2181
• YAZDANI ENGINEERING INDUSTRY v. APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 2009 PTD 2213
• MAZHAR MUSTAFA v. BASHIR AHMED 2009 YLR 2214
• MUZAMMIL v. State 2009 YLR 2222

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2009 →

best law firm from Pishin lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes