Find a Lawyer

ZAMEER versus STATE

Crimes Against Property (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance 1979 Section 24 (1) (3) The complainant who complained of not appreciating the evidence and two other witnesses of the prosecutor who were declared admissible, even though they did not support the prosecution. , But the rest of the witnesses who were almost equal in number supported the prosecution's case. The prosecution witnesses who supported the prosecution's case were setting up a patrol party and arrived at the scene of the incident and arrested the defendant's witnesses. I took, one of whom was a police constable, yet he was not inspected at all. The accused was given the opportunity to examine that the evidence of the police officer would be no less important than the testimony of any other prosecutor as there was nothing available on the record for the labeling, the prosecution's witnesses were interested, untrustworthy or untrustworthy. The accused is not capable of conviction and punishment based on evidence on the trust decree. It should be interfered with, but as the accused was confronted as an underserved P, during the hearing of the petitioner and the appeal, the accused was given two years' imprisonment and the benefit of Section 382B, CCP, The conviction of the accused was retained, but the conviction of the accused was reduced which he had passed earlier. family advocate from FR Kohat lawyer