STATE versus ALLAH DITTA
Section 417 Appeals against the Criminal Procedure Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 392, 324, 353, 212, 337 L (2), 186, 148 and 149 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997). The FIR was not named and in one case, the names of the accused / witnesses, the other named defendants could not be cross-examined in the cross-examination, therefore, it can be said that none of the accused was convicted. Was arrested and no permanent warrant was issued against him. Prosecutor's witness was at least related to the arrest of the accused / allegedly guilty because he was neither named in the FIR nor was the police declared a wanted offender, according to Medico Legal Reports It is reported that the two accused were also injured and found on their own persons. The police inspected, but the wounds were suppressed by the prosecution, the doctor opined that the wounds found on the prosecution witnesses may be due to a friendly hand. Thus, the trial court ruled that the suit was properly dismissed
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
attorney vs advocate vs counsel from Pindi gheb lawyer
