Find a Lawyer

ATIF KHAN versus STATE

The definition of sections 2?2 (b), 4?4 and reation evidence supported the purpose provided by the complainant and other prosecutor's witnesses as to the existence of an ocular account, as alleged by the complainant. Through the testimony of the witnesses at the trial, and even with the confession of the accused under Section 2 under2, the stated purpose of the CRPC was undoubtedly linked to the crime as the prosecution's witnesses revealed them. And although his motives did not prove the claims of the prosecution witnesses, the accused, etc., he did take importance Dude because the direct evidence in this case was reliable and the recovery of the unidentified character from the accused and by chance the more certified Acculon Account Serologist / F Section L report shows that the blood recovered from the incident and the victim's death. Upon analysis of the blood-stained clothing, it was found that the blood was found in the same group of human blood, according to the report of a firearms expert, it was shown that 7 62 bore etc. crime spaces were recovered and the K Chamber. Elshnikov, fired from the 7 62-bore SMG crime rifle (Kalashnikov), was arrested at the time of his arrest. The suspects were seized, there was no delay in sending the crime vacancies and the crime rifle was recovered / in the presence of witnesses to the ocular version provided by the complainant and other witnesses to the F-Section L post-mortem report. Further support was a doctor. The presentation of some of the prosecution's witnesses at the trial was neither fatal nor on the prosecution's case. lawer from fb area from Zhob lawyer