MUSHTAQ HUSSAIN ALIAS MUSHTAQI AND ANOTHER versus STATE
Sections 392 and 353 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 (i) of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) reaffirmed the allegations by presenting only substantial and concrete evidence. A conscientious analysis of the positions of witnesses shows that the accused played a significant role in the commission of the alleged crime. No clear contradiction can be identified in their statements, and so far as minor contradictions were feared, they continued to creep in and be safely ignored over time. Despite a thorough scrutiny, nothing beneficial can be found to help the accused. The trial court rightly considered and relied on the statements of the prosecution witnesses, who made it clear in their statements that the alleged perpetrators had committed the crime. The money was questioned by the accused, who were armed with firearms and one of them was arrested by the police on the spot, who was present on the spot and the money recovered was also recovered. It had a strong piece. Seriously and it couldn't be wasted. All of the prosecution's witnesses were natural and neutral, without any hostility to the accused.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
