ABDUL HAMEED versus STATE
Pakistan Penal Code Section 395 Crimes Against Property (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance (VI 1979), Section 20 Criminal Procedure Code (V Of 1898), Section 164 Law In Defense Of The Testimony (10 Of 1984), Article 40 Evidence Defined The lawyer was expressly convinced that the magistrate (second class), who recorded the confessional statement of the accused, was given the authority by the provincial government in this regard through section 164, CR PC. The above statement was not to be considered as legal evidence. The four-day delay in filing the FIR was not fatal. In the trial terms it was alleged that he withdrew the confessional statement in his statement under Section 2 342, CRPC. The evidence was the provisions of Article 40 of 1984. According to the evidence on the record, the accused was not a thief and he was involved in many other theft cases.
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
property advocate from Piaro goth lawyer
