Find a Lawyer

THARO versus STATE

Pakistan Panel Code Section 302 Validation of Evidence Cases incident It was dark at night of the incident, the attackers were identified in the light of the torch and the details of the main features of the accused not provided in the FIR are the source of identification, but with the help of the torch. The torch was the way. The assailants who were seen were neither presented to the police nor received by the police from the witness who was allegedly doing the same thing at the time of the incident, in connection with the accused and two other accomplices. Separate identification tests were not performed, but it was a general identification parade that was presented to the accused in addition to the two accomplices, the ratio of dummies was only five to three, while the identity test of each accused was different. And the dummy ratio was to be 8 to 10 (the dummy) was not to nominate an accused and to discuss the characteristics of the accused and his accomplices. The proper proportion of dummies and a five-day delay in conducting a detailed description and identification test, in view of the joint identification test, cannot be relied on as such evidence since the accused cannot be retrieved because of the crime. No vacancy was recovered from the premises and has been delayed for eleven days. The medical evidence in the recovery of the gun and the sending of a gun and blank to a ballistic expert did not afford to confirm ocular testimony. The accused State Council also did not support the trial court's decision, admitting that the prosecution had failed to establish a case. The trial court set aside the suspect, beyond reasonable doubt, conviction and conviction, and the accused was acquitted of the charge. online advocate from Pind Dadan Khan lawyer