Find a Lawyer

KHAN MUHAMMAD versus STATE

Section 2 accused of defining evidence2 evidence that he could not identify any misunderstanding, could not identify the lack of evidence or material contradiction in the prosecution's case. The complainant in the case was no other real accused, who fully supported the prosecution's case. Complainant's statement was completely controversial. The prosecution's witness who was the real father of the accused, both witnesses thoroughly tolerated the cross-examination test, no exact line of defense was taken by the accused, because the complainant, the accused's real father Nothing was coming from the record. He was falsely accused of failing to identify alleged contradictions in the Acular Account and the post-mortem report; the doctor, who had completely confirmed the ocular account, was not inspected at all. Yet the defense had the opportunity to file an FIR within an hour and a half. In this case, there was no room for litigation for Aga's fraudulent execution or forgery case, with the institute's alleged ocular evidence being proved with the help of medical evidence, as well as evidence obtained by the trial court. The defendant had already softened because the prosecutor was not able to dismiss the appeal against the trial court's decision, in the circumstances immigration advocate from Talagang lawyer