Appreciating Section 2 (b (b) evidence), the complainant, who was the son of the deceased and the second witness of the litigation, who was the victim's brother, were natural witnesses as they lived across the street from the incident. There was nothing on the record to show. There was an unlawful desire, animosity or enmity between the prosecution witnesses and the accused so that it could be included in a false case. The case of the same accused happened when the light was available and the real The question of substitution of the accused was not raised for the murderer. Yes, the Tanner of Cross examination stated that the delay in filing the FIR was clearly stated by the complainant, whose main purpose was to save her life at this time. It was through a doctor who conducted a post-mortem examination on the body of the deceased that the medical wound was not in accordance with the Aklok account, was accustomed to any force, the accused went to the armed spot on a dagger and an innocent person was killed for an innocent cause. The person died, but three injured, all on the stomach of the deceased, the accused worked in the cold, about to act under provocation. It cannot be said that there is no mitigating circumstance in favor of the accused. The trial court awarded the death sentence to the accused.
Find a Lawyer Near You
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
