Find a Lawyer

MST. HUSSAN ZARI versus SHER BAHADUR

Sections 302 (b), 324, 148 and 149 referring to the triple murder cross fire for Counter-FI and the sentence awarded by the trial court was high, the court determined on the basis of all material aspects of the case. The prosecution's evidence was inconclusive and it could not be determined who was the aggressor on either side. The only precautionary rule where one was in doubt about the authenticity of the witness and he was never the rule of law is the presence of two witnesses at the time of the incident is not open to any doubt nor their testimony. There is no reason to doubt the credibility. Every incident related to any accused was filed from all sides, its time, date and place was not in dispute and was not denied. The complaining party had lost three lives in the incident, while the fourth victim had survived, fortunately the five accused were beheaded with responsibility for the loss of lives. Evidence was available to prove the charges against the accused. It was alleged on the basis that it could not be determined that either of the two sides had initiated the aggression, it was a grave mistake to pay such a premium to the warring parties and I could never approve of being a butcher. To appeal, put aside the High Court's decision under which the accused was acquitted and sentenced by the trial court and the appeal was allowed accordingly. law websites from Khushal Kot lawyer