Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD BASHIR GURAYA versus RAJA MUHAMMAD IRSHAD

Section 497 (2) of the Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Sections 302, 324, 109, 120B and 34, except for the approval of further investigations, the exception of the co-accused, excused by judicial confession and the legal heirs of the victim. On the second day of the incident / conspiracy allegation, no other evidence was available against the accused could be sufficient cause to prove a fatal act, but equally it could be a reason for being caught in a crime but it was clearly May be strong, but its meaning cannot be proved. No basis for denial of evidence and bail can be made because at such times it was based solely on speculation and imagination, but the judicial confession retracted by the co-accused could not be considered against the accused at the stage of the crime. The co-accused would be entitled to be released on bail was not charged in the FIR. There was no eyewitness other than the complainant, the complainant accused three persons in the FIR by name and accused them of firing on the two accomplices, while the third person was killed in the accident. The accused was not charged in any of the roles, neither did the complainant or his co-accused make a confessional statement and the co-accused did not say that the accused had made any alleged conspiracy to kill the accused site. It was shown that the assailants opened fire on the victim and the place where the vacant property was recovered, the prosecution said. It was not according to Anne. There is no reasonable basis for believing that the accused committed the crime, but for the sake of further investigation of the accused's guilt. top civil advocates from Tobatek Singh lawyer