Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD DILDAR ALIAS BILLU versus STATE

Sections 302, 324, 392/34 Definition of Proof Confession Reliance Scope Both the suspects did not know either the complainant or the injured witness had an identification test to establish the suspect's identity, but the prosecution witness who was injured during the incident. Had never appeared in an identity test. And there were serious flaws in the process. That the two accused could not be identified separately. That the accused was mixed with only five other dummies against the High Court's principle that one of the accused should be mixed with nine or ten strangers. That the accused was a complete stranger to the prosecution's testimony and no details were given in the FIR. This was evidence that the suspect was in police custody when his confessional statement was recorded and an identity test was taken 14 days later. There was no explanation as to why the identification test was conducted after such a long time, that such delays would have a negative impact on the prosecution's case. That the magistrate did not ask the police at the time of recording the accused's confession, when the accused was arrested and the magistrate did not ask the accused when he was arrested and how many days he was in police custody. Is likely The prosecution witness, who had previously seen the suspect in police custody, cannot be denied. Identification of the suspects remained suspicious in any case, both the defendants withdrew their confession during the trial. The confession can be recorded on the basis of the offense only when it is proved that the confession was voluntary and truthful. The accused was admitted to the prosecution case law firms from Jatoi lawyer