Find a Lawyer

JAN ALAM versus THE STATE

Section 302 (b) definition of evidence was suspicious at the time of its occurrence in this case. No vacant land was recovered from it and no blood-stained land was seized. The location of the incident, therefore, was also suspected when the site planning in the absence of explanation on the very next day made the prosecutor's version suspicious, given the nature of the weapon used in the commission of the crime. No prosecution was disclosed. At the time of the incident, the complainant did not appear on the spot and the other witness was dropped by the prosecution for no reason. The statements of both doctors examined by medical reports and prosecution were inconsistent and with the ocular version. The specific purpose presented by the dispute prosecution was not proven The prosecution case was full of doubts and contradictions The trial court failed to interpret the evidence available on record in its original context and was charged with the allegations. Was made worse. online advocate from Ghuzdar lawyer