Find a Lawyer

ABDUL RASHID ALIAS SHEDA MOTA versus THE STATE

In the joint trial of section 2302 / Cri 34 Criminal Code (v. 1898), Article 239 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3), the accused were named in both F1s, establishing the presence of witnesses on the occasion. In spite of having a close relationship with the natural witnesses and the accused, the accused was found to have a completely independent role in each of the incidents, which, in particular, was described by eyewitnesses, the recovery of the crime from the scene of the incident. Will not reject direct evidence of anecdotal evidence. The ocular testimony of the incident was of a completely independent, trustworthy and unforgiving character, produced with the help of motive and medical evidence, in which the accused committed two murders within a short period of time in which the joint. The trial court proceedings were, therefore, for the same purpose. In both cases registered at different police stations, the trial of the accused was decided to include the charge, separately record the evidence of the witnesses in both cases and give them full opportunity to investigate. The accused kept joint complaint against the victim. Offering their shared intentions, they committed the killings at two different places after each other. By using the same weapons, the consolidation of the same sequence of acts and proceedings by the accused will be part of the same transaction and the joint trial does not have to deal with any legal impairment and two separate cases through joint judgment. Had to The trial was not illegal, which did not cause any prejudice to the accused. Using the same weapon, two deaths were made by the accused. law firms from Loralai lawyer