The publication of the monthly digest declaration submitted by the appellant for registration of Sections 7 and 26 of the Printing Press and Publication Ordinance 1988 was rejected on the basis that he did not enjoy good reputation and Section 12 (2) of Ordinance VII. (C) He has been convicted of the whipping law. It was posted in 1988 that the district magistrate could only refuse to confirm the declaration, where the declaration was declared to be a morally reprehensible crime, and such punishment from the date of its imposition. Must have been within five years ago and subscribing to this announcement did not meet both of these conditions. In the case of the appellant the appeal was allowed and the order issued in the form of rubbery by the respondent authority was set aside. The defendant's authority was sued for compliance with the Article 12, Printing Press and Publication Ordinance 1988.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
