The testimony of section 302 was the testimony of the complainant's deceased husband, one of the prosecution's witnesses, who was the real brother of the deceased and it appears that he was not a resident of the place where the witness was not witnessed, nor in his sister's house. There are no reasons for the presence of The other witness was also the brother of the deceased, another witness who was allegedly repaired in the complainant's house and was mentioned as an eyewitness, was not produced by the prosecution. As the complainant submitted, the prosecution's witnesses could not be corroborated so it could not be believed that no clear action was taken against the accused other than to promote Larkara and he was not charged. It was alleged that he is the real brother of the main accused, likely to make a false decision. The sentence and sentence awarded to the accused by the trial court were dismissed
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
