Find a Lawyer

ABDUL MANNAN versus THE STATE

In the value of Section 13D evidence of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance 1965, despite the delay of two and a half hours between the location and location of the FIR, only one kilometer of prosecution was not called, nor were two independent witnesses in the area. Two of the people present at the time of the incident sought to be called or called, despite the time of day, but the only free / private person who was shown as a witness was at trial. It was not held that if examined, the trial court did not support the prosecution's story pursuant to Section 342, C.R.P. The statement of the accused under C did not give full and proper weight, and at the same time, the trial court's statement in convicting the accused had largely ignored the principles of criminal administration and relied on the evidence. Content that may not be sufficient, satisfactory and reliable under ordinary and ordinary circumstances fails to prove the guilt of the accused beyond any doubt that the accused has been charged with prosecution, the trial court in any way convicting the accused Was not valid criminal advocate from Kalam lawyer