Find a Lawyer

ABDUL RAUF versus STATE

Section 302 (b) and 324 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3), the person who was raised in court by the accused in the circumstances of the fate of the fugitive injured complainant, was the statement of the sole witness by the courts. Was not properly appreciated in which the prosecuting attorney was able to record the injured complainant's testimony, which revealed in the FIR that the complainant's testimony was true. , No inherent error was found by the trial court in its convincing and credible evidence because it had been subjected to long scrutiny but did not bring any material to the record to doubt its fact. The accused had confessed to his felony and was arrested about seven months after the incident. A strong piece of evidence against him was cooked up to the defense witnesses, and more often than not, was not relevant or credible, so his testimony was dismissed at all when the prosecution's trial and defense version. When put to justice, the former seemed correct and credible and the latter was manipulated and managed, so even in the case of evidence not related to the usual sentence under the law, the murder of the accused in charge was death. Conditioners should be shown to adopt a gentle attitude toward the award of a lower sentence, which was alleged to be lacking. I can not point to confirm any illegal, false or evidence guarantee. Interference in the High Court's decision had led to the murder of four innocent people, as it was rightfully punished immigration advocates phone number from Dadakhel lawyer