Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ANIS versus STATE

Section 497 Impeachment Code (XLV of 1860), Section 395/412 Guarantee, Impact of Joint Maintenance Recovery The accused named on the joint indicator of a warehouse was not named in the FIR because the person's personal Freedom is also the backbone of criminal jurisprudence. Under the constitutional provisions, it would be better to place the accused on bail during the trial that the prosecution's story could not possibly know, which would require further inquiry, in which case bail was allowed.

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009

• SUDHEER v. State 2009 YLR 296
• NAZIR AHMED v. State 2009 PCrLJ 298
• AL-AHMED (PVT.) LTD. v. ANJUMAN FALAH-O-BEHBOOD, HAZARA MUGHAL GOTH 2009 CLC 299
• LASHKARI v. MANAGER, AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN, DADU BRANCH 2009 MLD 300
• MEHRAB v. State 2009 YLR 302
• SULTAN KHALID MASUD KHATTAK v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary Establishment Division 2009 PLC(CS) 302
• BANK OF CREDIT AND COMMERCE INTERNATIONAL, S.A. through Special Attorney v. Mrs. SHAHIDA JAM SADIQ ALI 2009 PLD 303
• MUHAMMAD UMAR v. YAR MUHAMMAD through Legal Heirs 2009 CLD 305

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2009 →

solicitors from Hattar lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes