The testimony of section 13 (d) was examined by the prosecution by two witnesses; one counsel and the other investigating officer, Zamir, did not support the prosecution's case and denied their signature on the counsel's prosecution, which the alleged complainant. The officer's adviser did not accept the contrary statement. He had shown that the accused took the police and the advisers to his house and presented the unlicensed gun in the presence of the advisers. The defendant's statement was neither endorsed nor corroborated, Mishis had taken a false position by the Investigation Officer and the prosecution did not examine the partner's case. Suspicious, the accused was entitled to the benefit of the doubt and the sentence imposed by the trial court was set aside and the accused acquitted and charged with freedom.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
