The defining character of the section 156 (1) (8) evidence was assigned to the accused when he was found entering the departure lounge of the airport with the accused, while at the same time the accused was admitted to the departure lounge himself. There was no crime, especially when the accused himself was an airport security employee. Unless its association with the co-accused is established, as long as the co-accused was entering, there can be no criminal consequence when the co-accused's confessional statement was rejected by the special judge's prosecution. I was unsuccessful. After the person charged against the accused, he was entitled to acquit the special convicted offender and the sentence entered by the special judge was set aside.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
