Find a Lawyer

BAKHT ROIDAR versus ESAM KHAN

Testimony of Articles 397, 109 and 34 of the trial court relied primarily on the confession of both the accused in convicting and convicting the accused, although both the accused confessed their affiliation with the accompanying accused. To the extent that he conspired to prove a crime. Haramba, but when it came to the actual participation in the crime, both the accused / confessors stayed in their own homes and did not come with the culprits who, despite complaining about their crime, were deprived of their fines. As it was taken in the FIR and it was reported that he and his deceased brother were attacked by three men who had punched their faces, there was no parade in connection with the two accused during the entire investigation. Was not made, one of the prosecution's witnesses was a resident of the village other than the village where the incident took place. The accused's confession can be used against the accompanying accused if it is proved against the builder and if it is proved. If so, the maker may also be taken as circumstantial evidence against the accomplices. Neither the accused was questioned in the statements under Section 234 Cr, CR PC, nor any question was raised by the accused, in which case no such circumstances were available. Regardless of the commission of the criminal offense, it may be related that when confessional statements were found to be excuses, each of them was not charged and recorded after considerable delay and when he Did not confirm by independent means. Evidence, they do not have the basis of punishment and punishment property advocates from Patika lawyer