Find a Lawyer

ZAFAR MUNIR versus STATE

The trial against the accused was proceeding in trial court and the prosecution witnesses due to the delay in the trial of the section 497 Prevention Code (XLV of 1860), section 302/34 bail, approval of the ocular account and definition of medical evidence testimony. Evidence presented by the accused was negligent, but the police arrested the suspect in connection with the complainant. The accused further requested that the story narrated in the FIR was not supported by the post-mortem report. , Trial order before trial date order indicated that deliberate efforts were being made. In order to appreciate the pleas raised by the accused accused of the length of the trial, there is a need to deeply appreciate and evaluate the material available on record, which could not have been done by the High Court while seizing some of the bail pleas. Material evidence was recorded. The case also included two witnesses, who had to cross-examine the defense doctor who admitted that the victim's post-mortem examination had completed his statement, at the bail stage, against the prosecution's witnesses. , Especially on the doctor's testimony and its quality would be inappropriate, as this case would be equivalent to vacating the trial court's duties. Contributing to the case, it could have been concluded that bail at such a stage equates to giving the defendant a bonus for successful flag operators, whereby he is unnecessarily But was able to drag the case, every offender had to move with ease. It has its own merits, therefore, fur advocates from Manga Mandi lawyer