Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD KHAN versus THE STATE

Pakistan Penal Code Section 302/307/34 Azad Jammu and Kashmir Islamic Sanctions Laws Enforcement Act (IX of 1974), Section 15 The definition of evidence was not disputed at the time of the conviction and on the day of the incident, nor was the FIR bad. Both were accused. The FIR designates that the victim died due to fireworks injuries and that the female victim was also injured by the firearms, with the distinction admitted that the prosecution It was alleged that the injuries were caused by the accused while the accused claimed to have caused the injuries. The shooting of a third person, who hates the complainant, has claimed that one of the witnesses claimed to have seen the assailants at the shooting from 88 feet away, but according to his own version, The reason for this was that the witness's statement could not be seen more than two yards away, so, because of this, the witness's statements could be rejected, the women's eye witness was violated by the complainant. Otherwise, his statement should be given equal weight to the testimony of the men. In case of torture, recovery, etc., the complainant's testimony which was a natural witness, thus, the recovery of the rifle from the participant was not reliable as it was not recovered at the time of the identification of the report of the arms expert. Such recovery was also denied, in which case, he was held responsible for the murder. Accused for attempted murder of victim and female victim, standard evidence for guilt not available against the accused when you need a advocate from Bahawalpur lawyer