Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD RAMZAN versus STATE

Articles 302 (b) and 148 Qatil Imd, the testimony of the testimony of the deceased, then the injured, doctors did not behave better than the fact that the injured body parts were injured and could not be dismissed by the prosecution. The trial was full of contradictions and contradictions, and the evidence did not affect the conviction. In the circumstances, such evidence could not rely on the accused persons who were on bail, their bail was canceled and the bail was dismissed. The men who were in jail were ordered to be released

Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014

• MUHAMMAD AKBAR v. PAKISTAN through MILITARY ESTATE OFFICER 2014 PLD 114
• Mst. NAEEMA JEHAN v. Mst. AKBARI 2014 YLR 116
• SHABBIR TILES AND CERAMICS LABOUR UNION v. REGISTRAR OF TRADE UNIONS 2014 PLC 117
• ASADULLAH v. State 2014 MLD 121
• GHULAM MURTAZA v. GHULAM SHABIR 2014 PLD 126
• HABIBULLAH v. MEHAR 2014 YLR 128
• M. AFZAL NADEEM v. PROVINCE OF SINDH 2014 PLD 132
• ENGRO FERTILIZERS LIMITED v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN through Secretary, Ministry of Industries, Government of Pakistan, Islamabad 2014 CLD 132

All Karachi High Court Sindh judgments of 2014 →

power of attorney advocate Alipur lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes