Find a Lawyer

ABDUL GHAFFAR versus STATE

In view of the value of the provisions of Sections 324, 337F (ii) and 337Y (2), the complainant and the prosecution's witness had fully supported the prosecution's version and accused the complainant of firearm injury, Both witnesses consistently followed the prosecution's version, which had the word minaret. They were described periodically; periodically; permanently. He was scrutinized extensively by the defense, but he failed to take full advantage of the entire exercise. Minor contradictions in the prosecution's evidence were unnecessary and were not fatal in this case. He was in complete harmony with the wounds that caused it. The injured person was subjected to self-abuse, he was powerless. The matter was immediately reported to the police without any time wasted and there was no possibility of consultation and deliberation. It has been fully proved that the accused had fired at the complainant which caused him severe damage by the trial court. The defendant's and the prosecutor's testimony at the time of the incident was based on an accurate and appropriate analysis / review of the evidence to believe the authentic and appropriate reasons and their testimony, and on such a record of defense witnesses. The statements were omitted to be valid and offensive. Alibi's wife, for reasons, thought it a good idea and said that as the WW applied for bail before the arrest, the co-accused's appellant sought to establish the credibility of the ocular version provided by the complainant and the prosecution's witnesses. What was not solid The suspect was arrested in this connection criminal advocate from Sialkot lawyer