Find a Lawyer

NIHAR versus STATE

The FIR co-accused was not arrested on Section 497 Appeal Code (XLV of 1860), Section 302/34 bail, grant of both the accused and the accomplices, but only four days after the required action, the Additional Sessions Judge. Gave him a guarantee. , The accused was arrested, and another Additional Sessions Judge, the defendant, rejected his request for bail, for which the accused appeared in the High Court for the relief that his alleged role was similar to that of the co-accused, but the following I had various requests by the courts Yard Stokes and the accused was discriminated against. When a judge / court heard bail plea of one or more defendants, it was the only one who was the same or Listen to all requests made after the application filed by the same or other accused in the cross case. Following the hearing of various cases, the additional bail plea of the accused was heard by different Additional Sessions Judge after hearing different rules. ITuner was sent to the relevant Additional Sessions Judge for disposal in accordance with the law property advocate from Tharo Shah lawyer