Find a Lawyer

ZULFIQAR versus THE STATE

Section 302/324/337 F (ii) (iii) / 353/392/34 The value of the evidence was not included in the FIR or statement of the accused, under section 161, CR P.C. Reported the incident immediately because the witnesses did not know before the witnesses. There was no evidence on the day of the incident as the suspect was linked to the ZZ incident. The prosecution's case was mainly the identification parade and the recovery of a blood-stained chapel on an accused whose leg was injured and Proof of rifle recovery. The credentials of the identity parade were not released without any doubt when the accused would not have the benefit of confirming the pistol acular account. First, because of the contradictions found in the statements of the prosecution witnesses regarding the date of the arrest of the accused, and the impression that the accused were arrested and the prosecution witnesses were shown, the prosecution's witness statement It was reinforced. The second reason is that despite the arrest of the accused immediately after the incident, the identification parade took place sixteen days after the arrest, twenty-seven days after the incident and three days after applying for the identification parade and, third, it was dark at night. There was no sign of the incident. The FIR was identified and no specific role was assigned to the suspects who were being identified, the report from the Franzic Science Expert was a negative exclusion for the vacancy, indicating that the murder case. I, who fired, failed to prosecute the suspects. Reasonable doubt beyond the reasonableness of the accused to prove guilt on major charges solicitors from Skardu lawyer