Articles 302 (b), 324, 148 and 149 Definition of evidence In the case of two versions, the shortage of confinement was closer to the fact that the delay in reporting the matter to the police was to suppress the injuries received by the accused in the FIR. The defendant was acquitted along with the accused / appellant. The co-accused was named by the police in connection with the murder of the victim in the FIR, two days after the alleged incident was reported to the police, CRPC said in its defense statement It was that while he was working with his co-accused on the accused, the party armed with suits raised Lalkara that the accused party would be taught a lesson in registering a case against him, followed by the accused / appellant in the fight and The co-accused, injured by the complaining party, suffered injuries at the hands of the accused / appellant during the fight. The latter two days after being accused of his right to self-defense and in his death, a doctor was born in his defense, which states before the trial court that he was in the presence of the accused / appellant and co-accused. The day the accused / appellant was inspected, he alleged that he had lodged an FIR before the complainant was present, but the police canceled him after the death of the principal accused / appellant, The death sentence for the deceased was sentenced to death, two co-accused were sentenced to imprisonment every two years and two co-accused were sentenced to death. The All Court acquitted, there is no justification as the complainant reported the matter to the police two days after the incident. The complainant did not make this statement in the FIR
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
