SIKANDAR HAYAT versus DEPUTY INSPECTOR-GENERAL OF POLICE
R 6 3 The police inspector, allegedly a deputy superintendent of police appellant, entered his alleged contempt case in the confession of the appellant for approved service, in which he reported that D-section P He was humiliated when the former visited the latter. After the Office received the comments of D-Section P, which denied the allegation, a prosecution proceeding was initiated against the appellant under competent and disciplinary rules. A copy of the comments made by D-section P, which could authorize his defense, did not comply with such a request and deemed that it was an attempt to delay the proceedings. The competent officer / superintendent of police filed appellant's misconduct. Proved and fined. Applicant-approved service for two years forfeiture
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
top advocate from Hala lawyer
