Find a Lawyer

BUXAN versus STATE

Sections 302, 324, 353 and 149 Offenses against Property (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), Section 17 (3) Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 Laws in Evidence (10 of 1984), Article 132 Testimony of Evidence The prosecution witness, who belonged to Section H, stated in his cross-examination specifically that he was unable to see the robbers due to continuous shootings and had no introduction to the accused. Witnesses did not say that the suspect was formed with criminals armed with deadly weapons. Under the unlawful assembly and joint objections against him, he committed the murder of the deceased and injured other police constables. The inspection of a witness would mean a chief, cross-examination and re-examination. The cross examination was an integral part of the entire statement, rather than the chief's examination saying that the trial court had no interest in saying the second and most important part of the prosecution's witnesses testified that the witnesses were involved in the crime case. What was the identity of the accused was not established by the prosecution as a co-accused, since there was no legal significance for the evacuation of the ward, in no way was the accused linked to the commission of the crime. The prosecution failed to deliver the accused's guilt to the house beyond the shadow of a doubt, on the prosecution's possession or his identification, the trial court convicted the defendant and rescued him from the sentence. Was released and accordingly he was released. lawer from fb area from Musafir Khana lawyer