Find a Lawyer

SHAHBAZ AHMAD versus STATE

Definition of Section 302 (b) evidence was filed approximately five to five hours after the FIR incident and it is stated that the F1 Complainant did not provide any details of the three accused who allegedly participated in it. Although he claims that he, along with other prosecutors, has seen the incident. The witness was not even charged with any specific role in the supplementary statement which, during the trial, alleged that he had made two borehops with 12 bore guns, the accused allegedly having been shot. Were taken at the time, which was not mentioned in the FIR or supplementary statement, all these persons were improved on material points and were sufficient to make the witnesses completely untrustworthy. It cannot be believed that the complainant, who had given details of the moment of the incident, had forgotten the names of the assailants, the identification parade report revealed that the three witnesses had identified the accused, Did not describe the role played by him during the incident, though at that time he specifically stated that the accused had fired at the victim when the accused's name was taken by the complainant in the FIR. No need for an identity parade then advocates from Pir Mahal lawyer