Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD PANJAL versus GHULAM SHABIR JAT

Section 324/364/435/452/427/218/201/221/147/148 Criminal Code of Conduct (v. 1898), a request for a review of section 439 was filed directly by the complainant on the basis of which the sessions court Had deleted it. The prosecution's evidence was not credible and the complaint was brought because the FIR filed a counter-affidavit against the complaining party in connection with the murder of the son of the accused in the complaint. Because of the evidence included by the complainant in the court during the preliminary inquiry court, he would justify it unless the evidence presented to him was such that it was an unjustified offense. This can be based on the material presented by the complainant before the court brief. The complainant and his witnesses were the interesting witnesses in setting up the first trial case as there was ongoing litigation between them in connection with the aforementioned murder. The son of the accused, in which the complainant's sons were named accused along with others, which was under trial in the trial court, consequently the decision was upheld and the application for review was dismissed. advocate from Tarmatan lawyer