The allegations defining the evidence of sections 4 and 5 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Islamic Conduct Laws (Enforcement) Act 1974 were designated in the FIR without any delay and the role of the accused was very clearly shown. The version given by the complainant in the IR was disputed by independent evidence. , Neutral and credible witnesses who had no animosity or hostility against the accused and had no reason to discredit their testimony, also confirmed ocular evidence through circumstantial evidence in the case of the post-mortem report. Was made and there is no hostility to the accused's example or there was hostility between the complaining party and the accused before the commission of the murder of the victim except through the direct evidence of minor dispute in the construction of the victim's house by the accused motive. It was proved, in the cases, that he had proven the crime with which he was accused after the arrest. He was detained for six years and faced a trial for nearly thirteen years
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
