AMAL SHERIN versus THE STATE
Section 302 (b) was not merely permissible for the trial court to review the evidence that the eyewitness account presented by the complainant and other witness was terminated solely because of their interest to each other. When the accused failed to stand, he said that the witnesses had incited any incompetence or illicit desire against him and dismissed the High Court with a specific motive, while approved by the trial court. There were reasons for rejecting the decision. In his statement under Section 2342, the CCP also partially admitted that the evidence on record was not supported by the trial and that the defendant had occasionally recovered from the opportunity of the accused. In fact, it was on gross grounds that false statements and false constructions of evidence were also speculative in nature. The verdict passed by the High Court was consistent with the conviction of the accused.
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
when you need a advocate from Nowshera lawyer
