Find a Lawyer

MST. NAJAM-UN-NISA versus THE STATE

Section 2 evidence2 The accused accused of defining evidence had no motive for the murder Both witnesses lived 60/70 miles away from the incident and were targeted with interest and hatred towards the accused simply because the accused was sentenced. It was a crime that led to the shooting. For the first time, the allegations of accusations against a major capital could not be fully maintained on this basis. There was no free co-ordination to witness witnesses, the co-accused were acquitted of the charges against them while the accused's character was found to be acquitted by the accused. Was denied the presence of the accused and did not happen, as the prosecutor suggested, the prosecutor failed to prove his case against the accused, who was otherwise on suspicion and sentenced the accused. The sentencing case was kept separate. The benefit of the doubt online advocate from Sakrand lawyer