Find a Lawyer

JAMSHED KHAN versus STATE

Pakistan Panel Code S 337A (i) / 341/147/148/149 Criminal Code of Conduct (V9 1898) Sections 190 (1) (b), 439 and 561A agreeing to the opinion accepted by the Magistrate Trial Court Subsequently, the investigating agency acquitted him of the Shariah Court on the alleged innocence of the accused, while accepting the review petition filed by the complainant, through an impugned order, the trial court held the accused After placing a new order in his honor, he was instructed. During both investigations, the validity of the modification order submitted by the police was seized with the final report to the trial court, which recommended cancellation of the challan against the accused, with this in mind, Should have worked fairly and honestly. The testimony contained in the FIR was supported by its witnesses, the trial court seemed to have been influenced by the tile statements of the witnesses mentioned in the subsequent investigation. While it was mandatory under the law that the police be kept in check during the two investigations, they should look into the matter before making any conclusions for or against the alleged identity value of those witnesses. The statements were recorded long after the incident, and those who were not here could not be exercised by the Shariat Court in this case, even if the name is listed in the FIR. The name can only be assigned through a trial court, Section 561A, CRPC was available to resolve the complainant's complaint. Thus the Shariah court guaranteed no interference and the appeal filed by the accused was excluded accordingly. registration advocate from Musakhel lawyer