Find a Lawyer

NASIR JAMIL versus DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT CUSTOMS

Articles 168, 171, 193 and 196 of the Customs Act 1969 ??? Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 ?? Constitutional application ??? Seizure of a car under section 168, the Customs Act, 1969? Still a matter of occupation under the judgment ?? "Constitutional application against forfeiture ??? Qualification ??? The case of occupation of the car is still pending; the applicant cannot challenge the validity of the confiscation order in the constitutional jurisdiction, because the court order was approved by the customs authorities. The applicant can file an appeal to resolve his complaint, and if he fails, consult the federal government through a review under Section 196, Customs Act, 1969. In the presence of such legal remedy, he could not resort to it. Without constitutional High Court constitutional jurisdiction. Without abolishing the dude ??? Constitutional jurisdiction is an extraordinary remedy? Can the administrative and judicial authorities be assisted with the sole purpose of retaining their jurisdiction? - where the law gives relief to another authority? There is the possibility of any kind of feeling, unlike the High Court, which has provided fully qualified treatment for them, and a volatile reflection on these authorities and their integrity and competence, thus the intention of the Legislature. to defeat. Under the Constitutional Appeal Customs Act 1969, it has been recognized by the applicants by taking the available legal procedures, which could have been premature and rejected. ??? However, the relevant authorities were instructed to inquire into the matter, take responsibility and take appropriate action in accordance with the law against the officers appointed within a reasonable time. advocates from Bannu lawyer