Find a Lawyer

AAMIR IQBAL versus STATE

According to the testimony of the site 230b (b), 7i7a (iii) and 7 33lf (v) murder trial, Shuja Hashima and the non-Jifa Hashima testimony site plan, the remains of the accused have also been kept at the site of the accused. According to the evidence were controversial and controversial, the purpose of the presence also strengthened the strength of the prosecution and all such facts make the accused guilty of the crime which they associate with the criminal commission. Record When convicting and convicting the accused, the High Court refused to intervene in the sentence imposed by the trial court as the case against them was under strong trial.

Related judgments — Peshawar High Court NWFP, 2013

• Malik SHER RODIKHEL v. KHALID AMEEN 2013 CLC 1823
• Mst. MEHMOODA BEGUM v. ZUBAIR AHMAD 2013 CLC 1834
• KALEEM ULLAH v. State 2013 YLR 1837
• SHAHID v. State 2013 YLR 1840
• Haji MUHAMMAD SARWAR KHAN v. ABDUL KHALIQ 2013 CLC 1850
• TAJ MUHAMMAD v. BACHA MUHAMMAD 2013 PCrLJ 1858
• VICE-CHANCELLOR KHYBER PAKHTUNKHWA AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY v. NADIA MALIK 2013 YLR 1860
• Mst. NAZO v. State 2013 MLD 1860

All Peshawar High Court NWFP judgments of 2013 →

top advocate from Hasilpur lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes