Find a Lawyer

RIND versus STATE

Section 497 (2) of the Conduct Rule (XLV of 1860), Sections 302 and 324 bail, the grant of further investigation was only to incite the complainant against the accused only to incite other offenders who caused injury to the complainant and his wife, The version of the testimony of the complainant and the prosecution was inconsistent. Contradictory statements made each other confused about the location of the incident, which, in view of the contradictory version of the complainant and his witnesses about the location of the incident, and no evidence of the crime's recovery. ? Arsenal, no definitive opinion can be formed against any person, the accused, admitted to bail, under the circumstances

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2009

• Mufti MUHAMMAD SHARIF SARKI v. PROVINCE OF SINDH through Secretary, Government of Sindh, Auqaf, Religious, Minorities Affairs, Zaka 2009 PLD 203
• MUKHTARUL OMAR v. STATE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF PAKISTAN 2009 YLR 204
• AL-AZIZ ROUTE TRANSPORT CO v. ASKARI LEASING LTD 2009 CLD 204
• ZAHEERUDDIN BABER v. STATION HOUSE OFFICER 2009 CLD 209
• LAL MUHAMMAD alias HAJI LALOO v. State 2009 PLD 212
• MUHAMMAD SALEEM v. Mrs. SANJIDA KIDWAI 2009 CLC 215
• CITIZEN WELFARE SOCIETY through Vice President v. KARACHI BUILDING CONTROL AUTHORITY through Chief Controller of Buildings 2009 YLR 215
• CONTROLLER (NOW DIRECTOR), VALUATION DEPARTMENT, KARACHI v. NADEEM ENTERPRISE, through Proprietor 2009 MLD 218

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2009 →

advocate from Ratto Dero lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes