Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE versus THE STATE

Pakistan Penal Code Section 2302/34 34 Definition of Evidence The FIR of the incident was correctly recorded in which the story was told in a natural way. Both the accused were not named in the FIR but their The details were given there because they were shown to them that the prosecution of the two persons referred to as witnesses in the FIR did not result in non-examination as they were close relatives of one of the two accused and He was discharged after success and no negative indictment could be taken against the prosecutor. Because the evidence for both of these witnesses was only in support of the complainant who did not designate the accused in the FIR, the eye witnesses who presented the account to the court were independent and neutral witnesses whose statements of the allegations There was no purpose to falsely impersonate. The witnesses were recorded on the same day under Section 161, CRPC and they had sufficiently explained their presence on the spot. The testimony was natural and credible. The testimony of the two witnesses was further confirmed by the witness. The suspect was spotted near the scene only after the commission of the crime said that the prosecution witnesses had long stood cross-examination and nothing was brought. Ocular evidence against the accused on the record of his testimony was proved with the help of the recovery of the weapons of crime from one of the accused and a positive report from the forensic science laboratory. Recovery of the deceased's identity card; a loot of Rs. 2,000 and a notebook belonging to the deceased accused from which it was recovered. advocate from Bolan lawyer