Find a Lawyer

RAJA MUSHTAQUE ALIAS RAJA YOUNIS versus STATE

Sections 302 and 353 of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), Section 13 (d) of the complainant, were fully involved in the statement of the complainant. The defense lawyer could not shake the complainant's evidence during the cross-examination. The prosecution's witnesses had no motive against dismissing the accused because no brick image was brought on the record to defame their evidence. The suspect knew of the suspects, who confirmed that the suspect was the person who fired the vehicle. Confusion over the name of the accused has been cleared by medical evidence. The evidence was fully supported by the prosecution; vacancy by the ward and the dead body also supported the prosecution. ? There was no enmity from the witnesses, nor was the record brought on record for any reason for spreading the record incorrectly. Under the statement, the accused was not recorded, the CCPC prosecution, without any reasonable doubt, proved its case against the accused, against the decision of the accused's appeal trial court under which the accused was sentenced and Sentenced, dismissed patent advocate from Domeli lawyer