Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD IBRAR versus STATE

The FIR was presented on the same day as the testimony of Section 9 (c) drug owner, the interim examination of the prosecution witnesses could give the impression that they were falsely implicated or Its enemies have testified to its statement. The witnesses were free from any material instability, the suspect vehicle was under the control of the accused. The report of the Franz Science Laboratory was on record, which shows that the recovered goods were foursecond. At the time of the seizure and the search of the personal suspect, a book of registration was found and it was said that the customs of the vehicle was paid, the charge against the accused proved beyond any shadow of doubt.

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2014

• ABDUL SATTAR v. Mst. SHAGUFTA BANO 2014 CLC 15
• RIAZ MUHAMMAD v. KHADIM MUHAMMAD 2014 PLD 21
• MIR QADIR KHAN v. AYUB KHAN 2014 PLD 25
• MIR SAHIB KHAN v. GHAZI MUHAMMAD 2014 PLD 29
• MUHAMMAD NAZIR v. MUHAMMAD IQBAL 2014 PLD 35
• MINA GUL v. SIRAJ-U-DEEN 2014 YLR 38
• PAINDA KHAN v. MUHAMMAD BASHIR 2014 PLD 41
• MUHAMMAD RAFIQ v. State 2014 MLD 44

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2014 →

property advocates from Kalam lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes