Find a Lawyer

QALANDRO versus STATE

West Pakistan Arms Ordinance 1965 Section 13D Criminal Procedure Code (V9 1898), Sections 342 and 364 Pressure on Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act (XV of 1975), Section 8 Authentication Section 342, CRPCF Was not compliant with. His representation was minimal through a lawyer and cross-examination made by him whereby he failed to support the prosecution or discredit his testimony; the trial court, in the circumstances, examined the witnesses himself. Did not try to discover the truth by the prosecution's witnesses claimed to have located the incident after the station diary was registered but it was not proved which created serious doubt on the fact of the prosecution's story. The accused had failed to prosecute, then the court had to go to the magistrate's court to try him. The trial court also obtained the certificate after recording the statement of the accused under Section 2342, CRPC and made the mandatory provisions of section 646464 (2). By complying with an unlawful offense, the CRPC, which was an untenable trial court, misidentified the burden of proof. As investigated under Section 8 of the Terrorist Activities Arrest (Special Courts) Act, 1975, the burden of the charges was not transferred to the accused because the prosecution failed to present a reasonable case against him. The accused were acquitted in cases where the restoration witnesses were not free [burden of proof] property advocate from Umer Kot lawyer