Find a Lawyer

HAJI MUHAMMAD AZAM versus THE STATE

Section 2302/7 337 D / 7 337F (vi) / ?88 The accused, who was designated in the FIR immediately recorded with special character, was admitted at the time and place of the incident. The accused could not prove that the complaining party was an aggressor. That the complaining party had attacked him and that while exercising his right to self-defense, his employee was late fired, the accused's plea was neither supported nor supported by the employee. Sources suspected of being an independent source proved beyond doubt. And the prosecution witnesses who were also injured in the incident and their presence could not be doubted on the spot. The recovery of the weapons of the crime was proved by medical evidence and the accused was convicted by the trial court and the accused were named in the supplementary statement which was not described. Through any basis or information and made the case against the co-accused suspected, one of the accompanying accused was declared innocent during the investigation, his involvement and active participation in his presence, the partner by arms The suspect was suspected to be in the nature of an alleged injury. It cannot be ruled out that these persons may have been due to the death of the deceased. In a strict level case against the accused, the suspicion was not beyond doubt; The accused was sentenced. tax advocates from Talagang lawyer