Defining the evidence of section 2302 (b), the reduction of the accused was immediately named in the recorded FIR and it cannot be doubted that the presence of the complainant and the prosecution witness on the incident in the light of a day. The prosecution's witness was present with the deceased and went to the complainant to file an FIR at the police station. Both the complainant and the prosecution witnesses went along the railway line with the victim near the scene and provided sufficient explanation. , Both had long tested cross-examination, but Rika did not want to prove their testimony. Was not brought into the rad. The truth and credible witnesses proved the ocular account with the help of medical evidence and the complainant alleged that the prosecution's case against the accused was beyond any doubt, the crime against the accused was proved, The trial court could not have interfered with the trial court by virtue of which it was merely a firearm. The same element of injury and family ho was not repeated was found in the prosecution's evidence and also in the FLR, what happened between the parties immediately after the incident was not clear. The death sentence was not death while maintaining the conviction of the accused, changing the death sentence to life imprisonment which was only a bee with the co-accused of justice:,, acquitted Lalkar and he did not hurt the victim. Had been reached and another co-accused was acquitted by the trial court, this possibility cannot be ruled out. By expanding the net to include other family members
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
