Find a Lawyer

MAQBOOL ALIAS QUMY versus STATE

Definition of section 2302 (b) in the case of the prosecution was that the accused and his accomplices were dragged from position to position B, which was more than 200 feet away, but no body on the victim's body. There were no drag marks that really ignored it. The plaintiff's version was found to have a clear dispute between the ocular account and the medical evidence. The presence of witnesses who were not at the scene of the incident was suspected to have occurred in a raging area, according to the prosecution, but there was no one present to the police or the trial court The case was referred to the witness who was not recorded on the spot, after the deliberations and consultations the case was registered as the prosecutor established that after the fatal shooting of the three accused, two accused were also blind. Fog fired, but by chance, nothing was recovered from the MMM rifle except for a crime and according to the prosecution's case. M MM rifle itself was taken by an AC. The recovery of the rifle 224 bore on the indications of the accused was of no avail, but to no avail, the FIR alleged that the dispute occurred 3/4 days before the fatal incident. The case was pursued between the accused and the victim, but the matter was pursued, none of the persons who moved the matter were brought before the police or before the trial court to prove the purpose of any case against the accused. Without a doubt, no trial could be successfully proven without a conviction. And the trial court acquitted the accused against the accused law firms from Noshki lawyer