Find a Lawyer

NADEEM versus STATE

The case for prosecution as disclosed in the FIR under Section 12 Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 302 (a), 377 and 201 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 203F. Prosecutor's witnesses were dismissively found that the minor victim was going to the canal along with the suspect, and during the night search of the incident, the complainant and the prosecution witnesses saw the accused coming back alone. During the interrogation, he (the accused) got upset and ran away and the strongest factor, which accused the accused of committing the crime, was the revelation about the sodomy commission with the dead boy and then strangled him. The body was thrown into the canal, which was recovered immediately after its arrest. The identification and prosecution witnesses also confirmed that the deceased's body was recovered from the canal, there is strong evidence that the prosecution case was instituted against the accused, the questions raised by the accused. They did not give a satisfactory answer. He was sworn in under Article 342, CRPC, so much that he neither took any oath nor presented any witness in the defense agreement, unlawful interference of any kind of unlawful decision of the Federal Shariat Court used, invalid Could not identify the reading, unread or false evidence, according to which the appeal for leave of appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court. immigration advocates from Chilas lawyer