Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD MIR versus THE STATE

Defining section 302 (b) criminal code of conduct (v. 1898), section 428 of the evidence, stating that he was shot by the accused behind the door, Syed complainant also filed an FIR against the accused in the same case. Was arrested, the co-accused was arrested, tried, but the complainant / prosecutor's witness in the said case was acquitted, examined, but did not state that he had died before he died. It was told that the accused had fired at him from behind the door, Section 2828 of the witness was examined on request under CRPC and the fact His previous statement for the fold was encountered. In cross-examination it was confessed that the victim had not informed him of whom he had fired before his death o Both statements of the sole witness in the case o f the accused and other co-accused were contradictory. Cannot be made the basis for the conviction of the accused There was no other evidence linking the accused to the crime. It was not safe to rely on the contradictory statement of the prosecution's witness, who was not an eyewitness to the incident. Without any free cooperation and in any case where the sentence was death, the prosecution will, without any reasonable doubt, Failing to prove his case, the accused was acquitted, giving him the benefit of the doubt. best advocate from Renala Khurd lawyer