Article 103 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) of the seizure of unlicensed ammunition and weapons by the police under the possession of the accused was the conviction that the evidence of the police officers should not be accepted by the courts as fact of the gospel. , Because private individuals were not involved in the investigation. The legal status of the police on the patrol duty, in the present case, the accused was arrested early in the morning and no one was present to witness the recovery of arms and ammunition from the possession of accused No.2. The material was kept on the record, making it appear that the prosecution's testimony against the accused was biased. The recovered weapons were sent to a ballistic expert from where the report was submitted and defended during the trial. No objection was raised by No request was made by the Defense Forces to investigate the firearms auditor. Ort, also a Positive Science Laboratory representative who fully supported the prosecutor's case, had evidence of police officers as good as anyone else, as long as there was a record of hostility, malice, malice, illicit desire or economic enmity. The High Court is not brought on record for allegedly falsely accusing the accused. The court, based on the proper definition of evidence, was not open to exception
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
