Find a Lawyer

ABDUL JABRAR versus THE STATE

In view of the value of section 302 (b), the statements of eyewitnesses were extremely unnatural and impossible because during cross-examination of the above witnesses it was on record that after the incident they went to another city without informing the police. They were reported to have been killed. The accused and he informed the police three days after the incident that when they returned from another city, it was clear that they had been appointed witnesses if they saw the accused committing the murder of the accused. The first duty was to notify the police or the widow of the deceased record showed that all the accused mentioned in the FIR, who were actually listed as complainants by the accused, were close to the prosecution witness and He was dismissed by the police with a bad intention; only he was presented as a policeman so far as the recovery is concerned The body of witnesses and adjoining houses was not included which was a clear violation of Se. In Session 103, the CRPC case should be the death sentence against the accused. In such cases, the evidence should be of such nature. And should appeal the argument while in the present case both the witnesses presented by the prosecution are being appointed witnesses. The prosecution failed to prove its case against the accused, the trial court recorded and sentenced the accused, was set aside and ordered to be released famous high court advocate from Khanbel lawyer