Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ARSHAD versus THE STATE

Criminal Code of Conduct (CR PC) Section 497 Criminal Code (XLV of 1860), Section 394 Crimes Against Property (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance (VI 1979), Section 17 (3) Guarantee FIR 17 (3). (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance, 1979, and the trial was under trial before the Sessions Judge, who directed the relevant magistrate to deal with the law, expressing his views that the case would be covered under section 394. ? The PPC, which was not exclusively tribal by the Sessions Court, allegedly snatched a taxi according to the prosecution's story and then committed Haraba in a house within ten minutes, but was sent to the scene Residents had seized him on the spot, the crime charged against the accused had fallen into disrepute. Despite the transfer to the Magistrate's Court by the Sessions Judge, the prediction clause 49 of 497, the nature of the PC and its nature was not changed so there is reason to believe that the accused was held in non-bailable condition. Committed the crime because it was alleged that the accused was denied bail in the circumstances property advocates from Mandi Bahauddin lawyer