Find a Lawyer

MST. DUR NAZ AND ANOTHER versus YOUSUF AND ANOTHER

Section 302 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3), filed immediately against the eviction, contains the full details of the wounds inflicted on the deceased person and the manner in which the incident occurred. The evidence was fully confirmed. The High Court's finding that the eyewitnesses were not only interested, immoral, hostile but also witnesses of the occasion, who were based on non-reading of the evidence, was sufficiently established on the record, as the eyewitness was the natural witness of the incident. That was charged. The unawareness of the proceedings against the co-accused was baseless and was not established on record and his felony proceedings could not be set aside for ten years, as the victim was killed and the accused involved. There was no secret in the whole area. And the Town High Court, in agreement with the trial court, completely ignored the reasons given by him for accepting eyewitness testimony, which was examined by the medical evidence and the trial court's decision by the High Court. The encouragement and reversal of the trust were declared to be purely baseless and irrational, arbitrary and imaginative arguments that led to unreadable and misrepresentation of evidence. The result was set aside and the trial court restored the accused's death sentence and sentence. famous high court advocate from Theing Jattan More lawyer