Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD IQBAL versus THE STATE

Claims 302 (b) / 34 and 201/34 of the testimony of the complainant in the court after 7/8 months of the incident were not credible and such improvement was solely and solely by the complainant. To strengthen the prosecution's case it should not have heard the evidence as evidence and the victim's widow had improved her statement at the trial so as to lose the extra-judicial confession of the accused jointly. The accused was not with the tire accused. Admissible in evidence which, otherwise, was always regarded as a weak type of evidence and did not corroborate any other false and corroborative evidence. best advocate from Mohen Jo Daro lawyer