Find a Lawyer

ABDUL AZIZ versus STATE

The testimony of the evidence in the Sections 2 302, 30 384 and 11re11 prosecution case revealed that the thief / accused was going with the stolen animals when the victim and two prosecution witnesses followed them while the accused party left the stolen animals. Gave and started running away and was the only victim who was trying to catch an accused while moving from har har party, who fired at him, no, was present to watch the accused's back. The identity of the accused / thief or the person who allegedly opened fire on the victim was not given by the harsh party. The FIR did not even provide a general description of the height, age, color or physical nature of the accused. The identity of the accused was identified during the parade, sixteen days after their arrest. Nine days for the appointment were transferred after the arrest and no explanation for the delay in safety was available. To obtain the rights of the accused, it was required by law that the identification parade be held as soon as possible after the arrest. Should, so that the identification can be seen by the prosecution witnesses before the parade prosecution, to avoid this, the identification The witness who made the parade appeared. Unlike the instructions issued by the witnesses in the High Court Syed, the prosecution did not record the statement of any prosecution witness or accused before or during the holding of the parade. He combined three suspects with eighteen inmates at home, combining nine or ten strangers with one of the accused. The trial court also did not rely on the evidence of the prosecution's witnesses list of advocates from Jehangira lawyer