Find a Lawyer

ZULFIQAR ALI ALIAS ZULFI versus STATE

The testimony of the evidence at section 302 (b) was not confirmed at the police station. The incident was within a distance of 8/9 km from the police station and the place where the investigating officer recorded the complainant's statement, which was approximately 2/2. Was kilometers. The investigating officer could not explain when he left the police station, nor could he explain the motive for which he left the police station FIR, and his significance was lost in the circumstances. It is estimated that it was filed after the consultation and on the occasion a preliminary inquiry was made by a prosecution witness who was a resident of the deceased, 25 km from the scene. The prosecution's second witness was also not a resident of the area. The prosecution's witnesses could not specify the purpose of their visit. The testimony of the prosecution's witnesses is related to the injuries attributed to them at the relevant time, and the accused was denied by the trial court, first on the basis that the co-accused was found innocent by all the investigating officers and Secondly, on the basis that no weapon was recovered from his possession, it was alleged that the Range Crime Branch Gun allegedly took the gun. The opportunity was recovered, but no blank was recovered from the spot and no other evidence sent to the Franz Science Laboratory for competition was to show that the allegedly recovered gun was used in the commission of the crime, saying the gun There was no legal result under the circumstances. Prosecutors also failed to prove the motive for the crime, in the absence of any free association, witnesses said. Pakistan, top advocate family court from Mamu kunjan lawyer