Find a Lawyer

KHAWAND BAKHSH ALIAS KHAWANDO versus THE STATE

The testimony of Section 392 evidence was not identified on the occasion because the pistol was recovered from their faces, live bullets and wrist watch did not link the accused to the crime because no one was present during the trial. Did not claim that they were not even charged. The only controversial evidence against him was the judicial confession made by the accused before the magistrate against the possession of an unlicensed pistol, which he repudiated at an early point in which the accused was convicted of robbery. And thus the rights of individuals were violated. how to become a advocate from Skardu lawyer