Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AKRAM versus THE STATE

The section 497 Prevention Code (XLV of 1860), section 302/109134 guarantee, the grant of the charges against the accused was, on his saying, the other accused named in the FIR, committed the murder of the victim's FIR. Was, why was he charged? The command was given by the accused to the accused and what was the enmity which led him to commit the other accused to commit a hate crime. No alliance was available to prove the motive behind the command / direction allegedly given to the other accused by the accused. Individuals, not only Inspector Section HO Police but also the DPO, investigated the matter and found it easy to put the accused in the rope, but such a charge was difficult to prove. According to the fact, strong and authoritative evidence, it would not be enough for any person to hold the Ipsi dixit of the police for an illegal prison term, although C was not bound. Nevertheless, he had some consideration when he was granted bail or denied bail; the accused was behind bars only after his arrest; no useful motive would be offered to detain the accused, The suspect was released on bail, under the circumstances best advocate from Dijkot lawyer