ROBINA SHAFIQ versus STATE

Article 4 (185 ()) of the petitioner's record of the applicant stating that he had no instruction and thus not pressing the application was excluded by pressing the petition

1986 S C M R 131

Present: Aslam Riaz Hussain, Actg. C.J. Nasim Hasan Shah and S.A. Nusrat, JJ

Mst. ROBINA SHAFIQ‑‑Petitioner

versus

THE STATE and another‑‑Respondent

Criminal Petition No. 92‑R of 1985, decided on 8th October, 1985.

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Attorney‑on‑Record for petitioner stating that he had no instructions and thus not pressing petition‑‑Petition dismissed as not pressed.

Ch. Akhter Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

K.E. Bhatti, Advocate‑on‑Record (Absent) for Complainant.

ORDER

ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN ACTG. C.J.‑‑

The learned Advocate‑on‑Record for the petitioner states that he had no instructions. Therefore he does not press the petition which is dismissed as not pressed.

M . Y . H . Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer

Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad

famous high court advocate from Noor kot lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes

👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.

Lawyers Directory Listing

Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

ROBINA SHAFIQ versus STATE

Find a Lawyer Near You