Find a Lawyer

THE STATE versus ABDUL SATTAR

Section 2302/3 353 / Cri 34 Criminal Code (v. 1898), section 417 (1), the appeal against the complainant was a police officer himself but did not explain the role of the assailants in the FIR and Ocular testimony did not say who caused the cause. No one was arrested on the occasion of fatal injuries to the victim. The mere allegation of defamation was not enough to make the accused guilty. Ocular evidence was lost and he did not link the accused to the crime. had gone. The prosecution had no benefit in retrieving the weapon and no specific role was attributed to the accused in the FIR and no witnesses had identified the accused on the spot, the identification parade was necessary. Which was not whether any of the prosecution's witnesses had acquitted any of the accused during the trial. Medical evidence did not link any suspect to the crime because it was not confirmed by any of the organizations. No justification is available to interfere with the verdict by legal evidence; the trial court's appeal against the defendant's fate at the trial was dismissed, us immigration advocates from Mehrab Pur lawyer