Find a Lawyer

ISLAM PARVEZ ALIAS ASLAM PARVEZ versus THE STATE

Section 5 (2) of the Conduct Rule (XLV of 1860), the defendant admiring the section 161 evidence, did not refuse to receive the money recovered from his possession by the raiding party, but explained that The bribe was never found either illegally or illegally, but the fact was that it was a public tax collection from the complainant's father in the form of agricultural tax, which he accused of defending two defense witnesses. The evidence presented was examined, but the credibility of their testimony cannot be broken. The accused had submitted the list of their respective owners in the village complainant's father was pointed out that the recovery of which had been tainted money against it. It is not enough to prove the accused guilty of an unlawful conviction immigration advocate from Parachinar lawyer