Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AFZAL versus STATE

Section 2 30b (b) Appreciation of evidence The conviction of the prosecution witness who stated that the victim was not murdered in his presence, was declared admissible and was examined by a public prosecutor. The sole witness in this case did not support the delay in prosecution. The recording of the F1R was unclear and in the medical evidence, the complainant's chances were denied that the defendant was intimidated by the ease of hostility between the parties, especially when witnessing the incident Was not made by the source, so was the evidence of the investigating officer's dishonesty. The investigating officer's statement from the record of the case denied the documentary evidence on the record, and said that the police officer who had engaged with the complainant removed the rough plan from the site from the record as he denied the prosecution's case. That the body was lying on the bed. In Dera and blood-stained land was collected from there, then it was found on the site of a plan developed by Patwari, which showed that the body had been recovered from the place where the bed was lying. The Syed police officer laid a trap of murder against the innocent man, the recovery evidence was unreliable, the prosecution witness who arrested the accused and the impact of the rifle recovery. The dagger, however, admitted that it did not seal the rifle. No resident of the area was involved in the recovery proceedings, just being the victim's fugitive, which was not proof of judicial satisfaction, would not be enough to prove the conviction, as the fact of the fugitive would be a piece of evidence and a piece of evidence. Proven proof famous supreme court advocate from Jatoi lawyer