MUHAMMAD BANARAS versus THE STATE
The SS 250 and 439 West Pakistan Prevention of Casualty Ordinance (in 1961), Section 5 (i) record did not show if the complainant had to disclose any reason for the consideration in Section 250 (1). When demanded, the CCP Equitel was ordered by the trial court to give the accused the benefit of the doubt and could not clearly discern that the complaint was a false, unreasonable or permissible trial against which to file a complaint. Was instructed to pay compensation, so did not meet the requirements of section 250. CR PC and so on set aside for review
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
immigration advocates email from Shangla lawyer
