REHMAT SHAH AFRIDI versus THE STATE
Section 9 (c) definition of evidence successfully excluded the prosecution's evidence, and the defendant legally raised the view that he was not only involved in smuggling of cannabis but also led to his recovery. It was alleged that he could not deny any evidence. The idea raised by the prosecution's evidence against him was also not charged by the accused with any personal prejudice or personal enmity, however, under the trial 343, the accused presented in his defense. Didn't choose to be. Accused of not disputing the contents of parcels recovered from the time of arrest until the recording stage
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
top advocate from Okara lawyer
