Find a Lawyer

ABDUL MAJEED versus STATE

The testimony of the complainant and the prosecution could easily be killed by the grant of Section 497 Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Section 324/147/148/149/114/337 H (ii) Guarantees, Deadly Weapons. If they had any such intention, even after finding out that the prosecution's witnesses suffered injuries only on his legs, neither the accused repeated their fire nor did the remaining 82 accused on the complaining party. Neither fired nor tried to kill them in any other way. The witnesses were on unimportant parts of his body, Section 324, PPC did not appear to apply in this case while the rest of the offenses were not affected by the prohibited clause of section 497 (1), CRPC bail for the accused. I was admitted Conditions

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009

• CLIFFORD CHANCE v. ASSISTANT REGISTRAR OF TRADE MARKS 2009 CLD 339
• Syed SAADAT ALI v. State 2009 PCrLJ 341
• QAMAR ABBAS v. Mst. KEHKASHAN SALAHUDDIN 2009 MLD 341
• AAMER ENTERPRISES (PVT.) LTD v. UNITED BANK LIMITED 2009 CLD 342
• INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN v. MUHAMMAD AYUB 2009 CLD 346
• MUHAMMAD UMAR v. YAR MUHAMMAD 2009 CLC 348
• MUHAMMAD AYUB & BROTHERS through Partner v. PROVINCE OF SINDH through Secretary, Irrigation and another 2009 YLR 348
• MUSLIM COMMERCIAL BANK LTD. through Attorney v. MUHAMMAD RIAZ JATT 2009 PLC 349

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2009 →

immigration advocate from Jalal Pur Priwala lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes