Find a Lawyer

AHMED versus THE STATE

No one saw the testimony of Section 302 evidence and the prosecutor's case was based on circumstantial evidence only. The complainant made only statements about the victim's body being discovered, while prosecutor's witnesses stated that they had heard the prosecution's testimony. Who had never seen her mother. The victim had stated that the victim was taken by the accused. The prosecution witness provided evidence that the victim was last seen in the accused's company, although the victim was the girl's stepfather but he was deceased. He loved and used them. After that he did not say a single word why the accused should take the life of a dead child. None of the witnesses said anything about the motive because there was no reason given by the prosecution why the accused should be included in the commission. No doctor has ever found a case of prosecution against the accused against such a felony medical evidence. Inquiry report did not mention the jury and no injuries on the victim's body, the victim's body was lying in a ditch, It is likely that the two-year-old child was stabbed in the ditch and found some internal injuries. Death could have occurred here due to the wounds. They could not be ruled out. There is no sign of torture on the victim's body. No, the recovery of the TPP can hardly be interpreted as a circumstantial evidence in which the recovery of the same WT was finalized. In other words, it was not supported by any other false evidence. The prosecution failed to prove its case against the accused and no doubt the accused was acquitted of the charges. top advocates from Mehrab Pur lawyer