Find a Lawyer

SH. MUHAMMAD AMJAD versus THE STATE

Sections 302 (a) and 365 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Article 5540 of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 188 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980, o XXVI's review of the principles of the Supreme Court was that under Section 40, 40, CRPC, the petition filed before the Supreme Court for recording of additional evidence of the representative of the Welfare Trust should have been rejected, Because in this case the accused raised this question. At the time of the appeal hearing, the unanimous decision was comprehensively dealt with and after deep consideration it was overturned Other evidence that the accused was sentenced to maximum life imprisonment, based on the evidence presented on record. And can not be sentenced to death. On the face of the record, there was no power to review the criminal proceedings, even if there was a mistake, which would obviously be of this nature, if I could not do full justice, in the present case the entire evidence was widely dispersed. Nor was any material fact disregarded, nor was it a matter of misinterpretation or reading of evidence, which generally did not interfere with the Supreme Court's review. If the quantum of punishment was imposed by keeping all the material available on record and only considering the intrinsic value of the evidence presented by the prosecution, then the accused alone committed the crime in a brutal manner. And was also given a legal sentence. The request for review was dismissed accordingly best law firms from Khushab lawyer