JHANDO versus STATE
Copies of the Daily Diary entries were not presented by the prosecution of the Explosives Substance Act 1908 Section 5 West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), Section 13D evidence to prove that the police party had indeed provided the relevant police stations. A general search was left to find that the judicial confessions by the accused were not found to be valid. In both cases, witnesses who spoke separately to each other had raised serious doubts that had adversely affected the trial. In this case, the recovered articles were neither sealed nor sent to the Ballistic Expert Defense, which indicated the arrest of the accused. The location of the events shown by the prosecution was not cocitted in the circumstances.
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
criminal advocate from Khanbel lawyer
