Find a Lawyer

KHIZAR HAYAT versus STATE

Criminal Code of Conduct (CRPC) Sections 540 and 439 Prohibition (Enforcement) Order (4 of 1979), Arts 3/4 Control of Narcotic Substance (XXV of 1997), Section 9 (b) Convention of Evidence (1984) 10)), Article 133 The prosecution's witnesses were recalled for prosecution The prosecutor filed the full evidence of at least five witnesses in support of this case, and the evidence was closed and the defendant's statement: Section 342, Was to be registered under the CRPC, five of the prosecution witnesses, three cross-examined by the accused's lawyer and two of them cross-examined by the accused himself, it was alleged that Requested to call back two witnesses who were investigating through it to give their lawyer an opportunity to investigate. He said witnesses of the interest of justice said that after the plea was rejected, the trial court filed a review against the trial court's order against the accused's lawyer despite appearing in court at the relevant time. The reason for such unusual behavior was that the accused faced financial difficulties at the relevant time because there was lack of coordination in the relationship between the accused and his lawyer at the time of recording of the accused. Since the statements of the prosecution witnesses, without any background, it was appropriate for the trial court to allow the accused's plea and to examine the accused's lawyer so that the witnesses said that the interests of justice The High Court should be set aside for promotion. The trial court has ordered that witnesses be instructed and at least one opportunity should be given to the accused's lawyer to examine the said witnesses. how to become a advocate from Chak Sawara lawyer