Find a Lawyer

PATHAN LASHARI versus STATE

Articles 302 (b) and 34 of the testimony were indicted on the main accused accused of firing the victim, which resulted in his death. The prosecution's complaint was submitted to the complainant and other witnesses who It was reported that the motive for the murder was earlier. The assassination of the brother of the co-accused by the victim's brother was claimed by the retrieval of the post of witnesses which stated that the victim was in the hand, the torch belonging to the complainant and six vacancies at the scene, The Blood Post-mortem report of the deceased revealed that he had received a single bullet to the right thigh that caused the femoral artery and vein to burst, as well as a fever to the right, resulting in trauma and hemorrhage. The victim was the victim of death. According to the prosecutor's witness who arrived at the scene with the prosecution's other witness upon hearing of the gunfire, he identified the suspect as E-torch's help, although several firefighters arrived at the scene by the sound of the gun, The police did not examine a single independent witness after which the parties' hostility was acknowledged, therefore, the prosecution's witnesses needed independent cooperation, more so when all of the prosecution's witnesses were concerned about the interstate. It was not reported how Kalashnikov's six spaces were found when the complainant reportedly fired only one shot. He was neither recovered at the scene nor was the bullet sent for any ballistic tests to confirm whether he was used in a recovered Kalashnikov rifle or suspected at the scene. solicitors from Barkhan lawyer