ARSHAD ALI ALIAS ACHOO versus THE STATE
The delay in defining section 302 evidence, if any, in the filing of the FIR was a case of daylight and the accused was referred to the sole designated accused in the FIR, part of the incident to the complainant and the prosecution. Other witnesses had fully proved that. There is no previous hostility against the accused on the basis of false accusation or corruption except for the real culprit; no contradiction was found in the medical evidence and in the account of the witnesses. He stood in the examination, but his statements did not reveal anything in favor of the accused. The presence of the prosecution witnesses on the occasion was natural and was fully explained by them, the prosecution had set up their case against the accused without any doubt through the ocular account. The accused has been convicted of drunkenness by thorough medical evidence and motions, conviction and sentencing. The court cannot be interfered with.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
family advocate from Naukundi lawyer
