Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SARWAR versus STATE

The contempt of court Act 1976 Section 4 Balance of Court did not allow entry to the police station for Danto's recovery, the accused refused to open the main gate of the police station and refused, as he was not satisfied with Bailiff's identity. The apologist accused the defendant of not fighting the two charges, the third was present at the police station only, but no overt act was assigned to him. The first was to try to justify his action. But as a matter of fact, the accused not only disregarded the order of the court but also the law. He was also obstructed and the disappointing order of the court was found to be contempt of court and the ineligible apology offered by him could hardly be accepted. Those who made considerable amendments to their conduct were punished in the interest of effective administration of justice under the circumstances. immigration advocate from Warah lawyer