Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD KHAN ALIAS MUMDAYA versus STATE

Defining section 2302 (b) of the evidence is alleged to have led to the murder of the deceased in a serious and sudden provocation as the victim abducted his first cousin nineteen years ago, who is the accused's first cousin. Who appeared in court at the request of the accused himself. The witness of the court had clearly stated that he was not kidnapped by the deceased, but that he had willingly and willingly married the deceased and that he too, with the consent of his mother, who was still alive and his father. The witness has also stated that she already had seven children from the said marriage and she was pregnant when the lady supported the prosecution's case otherwise the abduction allegedly occurred to the nineteen year old. The basis for serious and sudden provocations could not be made, which resulted in the mutilation incident before the killing, which took place in broad daylight. The suspect did not just shoot one bullet, but was continuously suffering two shots and sustained injuries, according to the doctor's opinion, which, according to the doctor's opinion, was sufficient to cause death in a minor's prosecution, He without any doubt proved his case against the accused, the accused was tried and convicted by a trial court trial. The court had already taken a stand under section 2302 (b), not the death penalty but the life imprisonment under PPC, but since the issue of enhancement of sentence was not taken up before the High Court, the court did not No comment on point online advocate from Washuk lawyer