MUKHTAR AHMED versus THE STATE
Section 2302/34 34 Definition of evidence was undisclosed and this case was anecdotal evidence, last time the prosecution witness of the evidence, although mentioned in the FIR, declared the complainant's contradictory and isolated statement in this regard. The victim, who was the original uncle, could not be charged on the basis of the death sentence to maintain the conviction of the accused on a major capital charge, but the testimony of the body's recovery on the indictment of the accused was also admissible and is a joint retrieval. Otherwise, the evidence was admissible even before the defendants were tried in connection with the extra judicial confessions. An attempt was made to revise his statement before the writ, but he did not say anything in the FIR, nor in his statement under section 161, did the absence of a PC accuse him of retrieving the weapon. The accused were losing their importance; the accused was acquitted in case of any crime recovered from the premises.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
advocate for immigration from Patoki lawyer
