Find a Lawyer

ZIKRAYYA versus STATE

Article 302 (b) / 324/148/149 The accused accused of defining evidence was specifically named in the immediately-filed FIR. Only one bullet injury was present on the body of the accused. He was absconding after the incident and was arrested after he was acquitted. The recovery of the weapons from his co-accused did not result in any seizure, since no vacant possession was taken from the victim even though the victim's father and the prosecution's second. The witness was also a relative and was not a resident of the scene. There was no reason to explain his presence on the spot. No real false accused were not identified except the real culprit and no contradiction was found in the account and the medical evidence was presented by the prosecution witnesses. The defendant's escape proved, enough to prove that the trial judge's guilt was up to the standards and standards of the higher partner company Url Trial Court had already softened the appeal by lowering the sentence. , It was deleted online advocate from Tharparkar lawyer