Find a Lawyer

ABDUL KHALIQ versus STATE

Section 2 302 // ???? ???? ???????? ??????????? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ?? ?? ?? The accused was the driver of the vehicle that the attackers used at the time of the commission of the crime in which two people were killed. In which the main accused were killed who were named as firing on the accused. He was absconding but the driver of the vehicle was arrested. The driver was sentenced to life imprisonment and sentenced to life imprisonment, which was taken up by the High Court player on suspicion that he was neither. There was no purpose and no role was attributed to it. No evidence of a valid name was presented, which indicates that the perpetrators were acquitted and the trial court failed to prove that the accused had any knowledge of the incident, before What to say about being a driver of an intelligence and planning suspect cannot be blamed on the commission for the absence of any specific role attributed to them in terms of convenience or rape. The High Court relied on the purpose that the alleged perpetrator had raised nonsense and defiance against the complaining party. Otherwise, the benefit of the doubt should be found. The prosecution had failed to prove the accused by presenting credible and credible evidence against the accused, the trial was approved by the court and was upheld by the lower appellate court and the accused acquitted. immigration advocates from Charsada lawyer