Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AFZAL versus THE STATE

The testimony of the SSCIN 302/149 testimony was exchanged after consultation and consultation and even with the delay of eight hours without convincing and plausible explanation, the five co-accused who were also equipped with firearms. On the same evidence, the trial court acquitted. Recovery from the accused did not appear to have any effect during the investigation. The accused had only fired one shot, contradicting the medical evidence was ocular testimony, the purpose of the prosecution was not to inspect any independent witness as it was not proved on the record in the FIR. The accused was acquitted on the benefit of the doubt in the circumstances famous lower court advocate from Garh Maharaja lawyer