Find a Lawyer

SOBDAR KHAN versus THE STATE

Pakistan Penal Code Section 302 (b) Validation of Evidence Cage Sen was sentenced to reduce incidents. The ocular testimony was consistent and convincing and could not be excluded simply because of the relationship between the eyewitness testimony and the Bald Oral attack on integrity. Eyewitnesses can never conclude the concrete evidence presented by them. The immediately-filed FIR contains all the relevant details of the incident, including the suspect's name, as well as the role he played during the incident, with medical evidence fully supporting the general account of the incident. Was That was the only basis established by the prosecution, which accused the accused of launching a deadly aggression against the victim or exchanging rape or pushing and not provocative enough to justify the murder. Likewise, refusing to claim a lesser conviction on a major capital charge, the marriage proposal by the girl's father did not justify her murder, and any such conviction on murder charges would not be enough to reduce the sentence. Approval of the petition would also be against the public policy based on strange social principles. The period stated that he committed the murder not in a spirit of provocation but in a planned and cold-blooded way for which he did not deserve any kind of relaxation, let alone the capital of the accused's old age. No one has been justified in imposing the sentence on the charge. Legal records or judicial record did not show that the accused was either mentally retarded or physically weak if the accused's mental faculty planned a murder. online advocate from Neelam lawyer