Find a Lawyer

NAJAM-UL-HASSAN versus THE STATE

Law Evidence Order 1984 Arts 132 and 133 Criminal Procedure Code (v. 1898), Sections 439 and 540 Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Section 419/420/409/468/471 on the date of the return of witnesses for cross-examination cross examination. When the trial court recorded the statements of the prosecution witnesses, the applicant / accused was not represented by a lawyer, after recording the statements of the prosecution witnesses, the accused was asked to examine the witnesses himself and he Only two questions could have been put in place, the prosecution's witnesses said, but the trial court did not raise both prosecution witnesses a single question to find out. The impact cross examination was the most valuable right of the accused and was the only vehicle through which the testimony of the witness could be tested. Cross-examination was a special art that only a specialist could use that would allow the accused to give the prosecutor's witnesses an opportunity to examine himself nst Justice's interest returned to the prosecution's witnesses for investigative purposes. The accused / applicant accepted the call and the trial court was directed to call witnesses back so that they could be examined. power of attorney advocate Gujranwala lawyer