MUHAMMAD HAYAT versus STATE
Section 302 West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), the prosecution witness's testimony of Section 13 evidence, made a deliberate attempt to suppress the truth and his statement was full of contradictions and he made the complainant's claim. Neff said that the report was filed on his notice. The witness was very late and very close to the complainant, and his statement required strong coordination at every point and could not be proved because nothing was brought to prove that the two witnesses of the prosecution The confession on the date of recovery of the weapon of crime between the accused was not voluntarily proved, the presence of the accused and the presence of the prosecution witness at the place of identification, was doubtful. The trial court failed to recognize that FIR was not a true version The prosecution's story was too dubious to warrant a trial Appeal against the court was accepted and the accused was made ACC to take advantage of the charge.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer
us immigration advocates from Lower Dir lawyer
