SHAH NAWAZ versus STATE
Section 2302 (b) / 442/2 402/2 452 / Acc 34 was not listed in the FIR for defining the evidence, but was involved in the case through supplementary statements of the complainant and the prosecution's witness. , The incident was recorded four months later with no eye contact. Under the law, the case against the accused was suspicious because the parade was not in jail, but was kept in the police station, which had no identifiable value and was inadmissible in evidence, in a very deserted stage. There was no recovery either. The prosecution was taken advantage of and the trial court's recorded sentence against the accused was set aside and he was acquitted and released from the case.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
advocate for immigration from Kumbh lawyer
