Find a Lawyer

ZIA ULLAH ALIAS JAJJ versus THE STATE

Section 17 Criminal Code of Conduct (v. 1898), Sections 103 and 154 of the Law Evidence (10 of 1984), Article 22, the Supreme Court of Appeal upheld, considering the shortcomings of the accused that the FIR lodged after the preliminary inquiry. Was charged and charged with. About Harabbah was entered into by the Coalition of Q. Further argument was that the eyewitnesses were not natural and probable witnesses and their statements were also full of improvements, contradictions and contradictions, and it was alleged that The recovery of the crime pistol is suspicious. The defendant also claimed that the test identification parade was flawed because the delay in conducting it was not considered satisfactory, and the role of the accused was not stated by the witnesses. Yes, there was no such identity as in the case of Mahmood Ahmed v. State, headed by the Supreme Court, SCMR 127 reported 1995 and separate identity parades must be presented for each accused. Or whether it needs to be clarified in view of the observations made by the Supreme Court to comply with this requirement. The PLD in the name of Halal Pasand v. State was reported in 1981, SC 142 accused also claimed that he was sentenced to death while his accomplices were acquitted on the same evidence. best law firm from Pasroor lawyer