Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN versus STATE

Sections 2 ??2 (b) and 8 45ation of testimony were reported to the police four and a half hours after the incident, although the distance between the incident and the police station was 12 miles. The names of the accused were not mentioned here. No details of the accused were even mentioned. The FIR incident occurred at three o'clock in the month of September, when it was dead in the dark and no source of light was mentioned in the FIR. It was not stated during the trial that it was alleged. Who fired the first shot and fired the second shot. The accused was a co-accused, but it was only reported that the two suspects opened fire on the victim's complainant, who was the star witness of the prosecutor, the prisoner of the house where the incident occurred and made such shocking evidence. They can neither be punished nor upheld on the mark. The accusation occurred five months after the incident, and after that time, it was not possible for prosecution witnesses when a FIR was given in the FIR alleging that Corbyn was allegedly recovered from the co-accused. No vacant occupation was seized by the investigating officer on the spot, the recovery of the firearms alone, will not proceed with the prosecution and the alleged carbine has been recovered. More than nine months after the arrest of the seven suspects, who were subjected to financial rumors by the prosecutor, another eyewitness, the complainant's first cousin, expressed no appreciation for his presence at the relevant time. Could not explain. In this area, your house is proof of this pakistani advocates Narang Mandi lawyer