Find a Lawyer

SHER MUHAMMAD versus THE STATE

Section 302/337 F / 34 Testimony of Evidence All four witnesses were natural witnesses of the incident, including two injured, as a resident of the house while inside the wall, when the accused did not deny his presence at the time. Was. The incident and they could not even deny the presence of the injured witnesses. The four witnesses were examined at length, but nothing was extracted which gave their concrete evidence on the question of injuries to the victim and two of them. Which have incredible and skeptical evidence. Both sides were expected to fight because of the involvement of the accused in the incident and injuries to the deceased and the prosecution witnesses, and they were not only prepared for it but also for prosecution. The two parties were united when they were the agitating parties; the encounter happened. Such incidents were always a free fight and E-Chowdhury was responsible for his own individual action and the parties did not claim their right to defend themselves against each other. Allegations that, under the circumstances, PPC was convicted under deceased 302, accused of murdering and Omar was sentenced to life in prison. But in order to hurt the prosecution's witnesses, his conviction and sentence was set aside under Section 337 F (ii), PPC, and he was acquitted on a charge that proved that he was guilty of prosecution. Witnesses are hurt, punished and punished under section 337F (ii). ), The PPC was retained, but was convicted of a crime under Section 302, PPC, and acquitted of the murder of the victim. law firms from Narang Mandi lawyer