Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD MUMTAZ versus THE STATE

Definition of Section 2 (2 (b) / re 34) The accused did not cause any injury to the body of the deceased as it was alleged in the FIR that his fire caused a loss of life and his The common element of responsibility is the determining factor from the mansion, where not all the suspects appearing at the scene of the incident were related to the accused. The witness had made it clear that the accused had no intention of shooting at the victim. There was no intention of doing so, giving the accused more bullets. There was no obstruction to the murder, no vacancies were recovered at the scene of the incident, the accused could not be convicted on the basis of his relationship with the co-accused. A major injury was thrown in which the accused was declared a co-accused. The PPC, suspected of participating in a joint intention under section 34 of E, was given the benefit of the doubt and the trial court He was acquitted of his sentence and sentence. tax advocates from Jauharabad lawyer