SOOMAR versus THE STATE
Section 324/392/393/394/34 West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), Section 13D Anti Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 (B), has been charged with defining the evidence that the accused has filed against the trial court. Did not press his appeal against the verdict, but requested that the sentence awarded by the trial court be reduced. The dispute was that one of the accused was a youth and not a former culprit and he belonged to a very poor family and was suffering from conditions which led him to repent of his act and in the future. It was also decided not to be involved in such activities in the case of legitimate indicators of the co-accused. In that case, after the reduction, such a gentleman in the case of the state prosecuting attorney. The idea can be taken. The accused said that the convicted and sentenced to five years and a fine would meet the end of justice.
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
online advocate from Satyana Bangla lawyer
