Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SALEH versus STATE

Section 497 of the Code of Conduct (XLV of 1860), section 324/147/148/149/114 bail, is filed with an FIR grant complaint with 15 hours and 15 minutes delay after consultation with its relatives. The FIR cross-case was also registered by the accused party, allegedly because of the prosecution's testimony that the injuries were not brought under the prohibition clause 497 (1), the CCP suspects deadly weapons. And if they had any intention of killing any of the prosecution witnesses, they could easily have done it, especially since the other party had an unarmed case against the accused, therefore, I need to get excited, the accused was admitted to bail conditions.

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009

• MEKOTEX (PVT.) LTD., KARACHI v. CHAIRMAN, APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUSTOMS, FEDERAL EXCISE AND SALES TAX, KARACHI 2009 PTD 1158
• RABEL alias RABO alias SIKANDAR v. State 2009 YLR 1162
• HABIBULLAH v. State 2009 MLD 1162
• Mst. KHADIJA DAWOOD v. 1ST ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, (KARACHI) EAST 2009 YLR 1165
• MISBAHUDDIN KHAN v. BOARD OF REVENUE, SINDH through Member (Land Utilization), Hyderabad 2009 MLD 1172
• Mian KHUDA BUX QURESHI v. PROVINCE OF SINDH through Secretary Auqaf, Zakat, Ushar Department, Old K.D.A. Building 2009 CLC 1175
• Mrs. YUBA JAMIL ANSARI v. BANK AL-FALAH LIMITED 2009 CLD 1177
• TAYYAB ALI, ALI BHAI KARIM JEE WAQF through Managing Trustee v. MUHAMMAD IQBAL 2009 YLR 1178

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2009 →

jobs for fresh advocates from Sakrand lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes