Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD ASHRAF KHAN versus STATE

Sections 232, 236, 237, 238 (2) and 265 D Panel Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 120B and 324 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Sections 7 (b) and 25 of the Counter-Terrorism Court. Appeal allegations against the appellant / accused confessed to the magistrate facts and confessed to the crime, revealed that the alleged crime against the accused was to commit murder, but this charge was charged with murder. The accused was charged with conspiracy, the person was charged, the situation was not in accordance with the facts of the case and was against the spirit of the law. The offender was also convicted. The trial court praised the prosecution's story, accusing it of conspiring to commit the murder and, as stated in the police report, documents and statements in the prosecution case that led to false facts. In charge, the trial court had violated the provisions of Section 2365 (2), Section 265D, CCPC under CRPC; the court could punish an accused more than guilty of a minor offense. Yes, there was no provision available in CRPC. Sections 236 and 237, more than the provisions of the CR PC, were not attracted, but in this case the provisions of section 232, CR PC were attracted, in which case the proceedings from the charge stage only. Was illegal, as it faced appellant / prejudice. As a result of the failure of justice, the accused, who could not be treated under section 373737, was acquitted of the PC trial. The trial proceeded in the trial court for re-hearing from the charge stage. jobs for advocates from Peshawar lawyer