Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SHAHZAD versus STATE

Section 497 (2) of the Conduct Rule (XLV of 1860), Sections 324, 336, 392, 394 and 109 guarantees, further investigation cases were granted overnight and in accordance with the FIR, the accused entered the complainant. Was not included. The alleged crime was allegedly committed but the FIR only charged the accused but there was no evidence to suggest that the charge was mentioned. The alleged victim said that the faces of the culprits had been blended in during the alleged incident, but one of the accused was unveiled during the proceedings and admitted that the offender had been disclosed to the FIR. None of them had damaged her face. It showed that the alleged victim had married the accused some time ago, it was not easily credible that the accused was not. At an early stage, the target was either the victim or someone else from the complaining party, there were two versions of the prosecution, the first version was included in the FIR registration. Further investigation into the alleged co-accused by the accused and on other occasions the physical pressure of the accused and the alleged participation in the incident have been further stated that he himself had brought the case against the accused. Which was another investigative matter. Had already been finalized and his physical custody no longer required that an inquiry case be sought against the accused demanding further investigation into his crime, he entered into bail, under conditions \ r \ n \ r \ n immigration advocates email from Yazman Mandi lawyer