Find a Lawyer

GUL MUHAMMAD versus THE STATE

Definitions of Pakistan Panel Code Sections 365A / 34 and 109/34 evidence were not initially named in the FIR. The same accused was acquitted on almost the same evidence and his success was not challenged. The abductor did not identify the accused under Section 1 Section 1, the court denied his statement, CCPCP was rejected by the magistrate under CCP under64 under, CCP was invalid and unreliable and The Identity Parade proceedings also held that there was no confrontation between the accused and the police, despite no ammunition or crime. The scene was recovered from the scene, nor were the weapons and ammunition fired at the accused before being presented to the police, who were allegedly shot in the court chains. Was not presented, as well as the kidnappers were also severely beaten. The court is very careful before recording confessional statements. The statements of the accused were not taken. There was no evidence of prosecution at all, and there was no evidence on the record that the accused had demanded or paid any ransom money, the defense evidence agreed that the accused was already in police custody. They were released and could not be released. The accused was acquitted on non-payment of money demanded by them. lawer from fb area from Renala Khurd lawyer