Find a Lawyer

MUKHTAR ALIAS SADRI versus STATE

Section 2302 (b) / evidence 34 Definition of evidence Benefits of doubt Not verifying ocular account through medical evidence Two offenders are involved in mystery or insufficient mystery of motivation / Impeachment charges against accused / appellants (three in number) It was that he along with the seven accomplices accused the trial court of murdering two persons in a dispute over divorce, while the co-accused was acquitted and convicted and the three accused were sentenced to death. That the medical evidence falsifies the ocular account as the two culprits / accused. Therefore, the same should not be considered against the third culprit / accused. The trial was held in the FIR and was not presented to the prosecutor by any independent witness, although an FIR was filed immediately, but the eyewitnesses exaggerated the case. Therefore, it was necessary to search the grains for two of the culprits / appellants. First, witnesses reported that the first leg was hurt from a distance of 4/5 feet but the wounds did not have to be black or burned. Secondly, the two external wounds of the victim were assigned to one of the accused, the other deceased received only two injuries and not three, but according to eyewitnesses, the prosecution had trapped the two accused for one injury, so it cannot be said. Which of the two suspects is due to injury; nor can it be said exactly whether the injury was caused by a shotgun or a rifle. The broken door was not occupied by the investigating officer. No 12 bore was recovered from the blank. Evidence of evidence in the prosecution case against the two accused immigration advocates phone number from Hujra Shah Muqeem lawyer