Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ARSHAD versus THE STATE

Section 302 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3), the testimony of the prosecution provided a beautiful explanation of the prosecution's presence at the time of the incident, as they said it was called by another witness. There was nothing suspicious about. The presence of both witnesses at the time of the incident Syed witnesses described the incident with the utmost precision that could have been possible only after they had known everything through their senses that the witnesses had shot the accused dead and his. Although the witnesses said they had been subjected to a lengthy cross-examination, the defense failed to break their testimony, which remained uncontested, the complainant was the real brother of the victim, and he had to convict a criminal to replace the real culprit. Was not expected, because he could never tolerate that the real killer was punished by his brother. Should be avoided list of supreme court advocates from Bagh lawyer