Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD IMRAN versus STATE

Before being convicted of Section 6 Criminal Code of Conduct (V9 1898), Sections 243, 164, 342 and 439, Sections 164 and 342, found guilty of possessing non-standard content on their statement filed under CRPR Validity Trial Court. Was sentenced. Section 243 was under an obligation under the CRPC when they wanted to inquire after the crime was committed and confessed to proving why they could not be prosecuted and the section. Requirement of showcase notice under 243; PC was necessary to avoid unnecessary admission. , Recording of both the statements of the accused under Sections 164 & and 342, was not jointly valid under the PC. The accused was acquitted under the circumstances and accordingly a review petition was approved divorce advocates from Mangal Sada lawyer