Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF KHAN versus STATE

Definitions of the provisions of Sections 324, 337D and 337F (v), the complainant filed an FIR against the accused and the co-accused was targeted with a 12 bore gun which struck the victim on his stomach and his body. In the second part, the accused was found guilty. The court sentenced the accused under Sections 324, 337D and 337F (V), PPC and up to seven years imprisonment. The complaint filed by the complainant and the appeal filed by the accused is instructed to uphold the sentence, to reduce the sentence under section 324, PPC, as well as to execute the convictions, on the occasion of the presence of the injured victim. There was no doubt about the presence, Victim himself appeared in court as a prosecution witness and there was no possibility of making false accusations against the accused as it was a one-day incident and the defendant was a resident of a sensible location supporting the ocular account. The medical court, through medical evidence, alleges that the culprits were charged with causing injury to the accused For almost five years, the trial was subjected to torture and it fired a single bullet. And the Daman Judgment directed the appellate court to reduce the sentence from seven to four years and to run concurrently, which did not demand interference, by the complainant before the First Amendment Appellate Court to increase the complaint. Was filed, no further review before the High Court. The appellate court's decision found no judicial error or absence of misrepresentation or material evidence. The High Court dismissed the petition accordingly. property advocate from Jehanian lawyer