MUHAMMAD ARIF versus THE STATE
Section 2 (b (b) / & F and 7 337F (ii) / 34 34) Defining the evidence The accused was immediately named in the FIR filed by the complainant and the injured witness on the spot. Presence of eyewitnesses, including eyewitnesses, was established, and their statements raised confidence that the blood stains used in the commission of the crime were recovered as examples of the accused, from medical evidence and criminal recoveries. The testimony was authenticated There was no enmity with the prosecution's witnesses falsely involved in the case, the prosecution was proved and Luzman's sentence was upheld
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
patent advocate from Noorpur nooranga lawyer
