Find a Lawyer

MANSOOR AHMAD versus THE STATE

Article 302/324/148/149 Testimonies of Evidence The complainant and the prosecution witnesses made common allegations against all the accused that on the day of filing the complaint to the complainant, the police did not take anything in their presence and complained. ? Inspector of Complainant, during cross-inspection, stated that no FIR was read on him and his thumb impression was obtained on blank paper. The complainant denied the entire story of the prosecutor, when other witnesses of the prosecution also stated that they did not know anything about the case and when the cross-examination was conducted. Through a public prosecutor, he made it clear that the accused in the court were not guilty (nothing was available because of the ink to the accused prosecution witness's murder) and that the attackers knew the ocular evidence. No, under the circumstances, the police could not be used to delay the reporting of the case. Reasonably defined medical evidence suggests that the victim's death was caused by fireworks injuries. , But it could not be ascertained that the suspect was set on fire by the motorway because of the trial. Nothing was proved in Varan FIR as nothing was on record to show that the accused was sentenced on the basis of recovery only for the purpose of taking part in the incident, but no report from the forensic science laboratory records. However, the accused partner was acquitted on grounds that the vacancy was dismissed from the weapons recovered from the accused. The same proof Pakistan, top advocate family court from Khurian wala lawyer