Find a Lawyer

GHULAM HUSSAIN ALIAS PATEELI versus THE STATE

Pakistan Penal Code Section 302/307/34 Defining Evidence The motive of the case was considered by the trial court to be a double weapon because it was the reason for making false accusations against the commission of the crime as well as by any independent witness complainant. Was not done, who was a close relative of the deceased, neither was injured in the incident, nor did he go to the hospital with the injured nor recovered the bodies, on the spot the complainant's presence, on the spot, was fine. The three court witnesses, suspected by the trial court, were detained from various areas located approximately six to six miles from the scene. Were bleak, were not natural to witness the incident, but witnesses say they need to independently demonstrate the interest that seriously. The account was neither endorsed by the motive nor by medical evidence because no specific injury was attributed, nor any attacker, including the suspect, recovered any weapon from the accused. The recovery was unusual and the accused did not escape and the prosecution could not prove his fate during the trial because it contained statements from eyewitnesses. Respected, unadulterated by any independent means, it was alleged that he could have been acquitted on the basis that the case had not been proved against all or any of the accused by the evidence of the prosecution, the benefit of the doubt was to be extended to them and The sentence was pronounced. The trial court had set the accused free online advocate from Mangal Sada lawyer