Find a Lawyer

HAMEED GUL versus TAHIR

Section 302/324 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) Re-examination of testimony absent incident declaration of death relied primarily on the declaration of the victim's prosecution, following the death of the injured. The complainant was not a witness himself without being brought. The incident and the doctor who signed the deceased statement admitted that it was not recorded in his presence but was presented by the investigating officer and he had signed only the investigating officer that Did not record the statement, but the injured victim sentenced him. And the High Court set aside the sentence given by the trial court and the accused were acquitted. The injured were unconscious for a long time and they also became unconscious when the investigating officer approached him at the hospital. Can be done, because the superior said that this declaration could be the result of consultation and indication could not be relied upon by the victim's relatives in the light of which the accused was identified, sixteen days after the incident. He was later presented to the Investigation Officer who presented the torch to the investigating officer. Was not presented in asthma. Therefore, there is no convincing evidence that the torch was identical in the given circumstances, that the torch was never recovered at the time of the incident with other recoveries, although the injured and the deceased had no chance. There was no evidence to show how the deceased's declaration came into the possession of the person who presented it to the investigating officer. tax advocates from Pishin lawyer