Find a Lawyer

RANA RIAZ AHMAD KHAN versus STATE

After obtaining information on the theft of Section 249A and 561A Panel Code (XLV of 1860), Section 182 Government Trees, Section HA should have taken this matter seriously and the fate of the application submitted by the applicant limber. Should have taken this matter seriously. In view of the material evidence gathered in this regard, it has been decided that the petition should not have been misconstrued simply because the applicant had failed to appear before Section H in response to the summons, but the record was oral. Or documentary evidence was not available. To show that the applicant had committed an offense that attracted the delivery of Article 182, PPC, under the law, the person providing the information to the police is entitled to be lied to earlier. The information should be settled in court before seeking an answer to the allegation of information. Applicant was requested to explain his position on why action cannot be taken under Section 182, PPC, proceeding against the applicant under section 182, PPC. However, the charge leveled against the applicant would be a misuse of the law process and in this case there was no possibility of retribution while both the courts acted illegally. The applicant had already faced trial proceedings and hardships for five years, resulting in the trial court, excluding the applicant's application under section 249A, CCPC and reviewing the petition filed by him. And the disapproval orders approved by the review court were deferred divorce advocates from Matli lawyer