Find a Lawyer

WARIS KHAN versus STATE

Section 242424 / Cri 34 Criminal Code (v. 1898), Non-examination of witnesses under Section 161 Definition of Evidence Section 161, CR PCF one of the four accused was already acquitted by the trial court and two were appealed. The High Court had acquitted. The central suspect, who was the father of the acquitted accused, was charged with effective firing which injured the fire arm on the injured prosecution witness's bald / Bald statement of the victim / injured witness that he remained unconscious for five months. Medical evidence was not supported, admitted to working as a driver abroad, which means he has not lost any 'Edo' and 'Capacity Edo' nor is he working. , The working accused claimed that under section 161, CR PC, the injured witness was un-examined. It was prejudiced. The defendant's confession was answered because in the very FIR and, at the time of surrender / arrest, the suspect knew that he had been accused of setting fire. It was believed that the injured wounds would appear against him and would present evidence nor was he accused of prejudice / defense as he was not surprised and could not inspect the injured. Due to. Police allege he was the father of the acquitted accused, he was of a hostile nature, and to the extent that it was not disclosed by the prosecutor that he had any medical evidence other than a statement of injury. It was not available that he had been unconscious for so long, the casualty suffered a single head injury to his head but he was pursuing his normal life. online advocate from Chaman lawyer