Find a Lawyer

TAJ AHMAD ALIAS MUMTAZ versus STATE

Section 302 (b) Testimony of Evidence The Benefit of Doubt Both witnesses of critical importance testified that the prosecutor had refused to support a prosecution case against the ocular account presented by the prosecutor, and there was a serious danger in the circumstances. The complainant faced a severe complaint, the victim's father, his home a kilometer away from the scene of the incident, but did not specify why he was late to his shop at the time of the incident. The complainant's claim of presence at this place was sufficiently suspected that the incident occurred at the relevant time that the complainant had filed an E The IR said that the suspect was equipped with a rifle 303, but then stated in a supplementary statement that the suspect was equipped with a rifle 8 minutes, a witness to the prosecution, who was either the complainant or the late He didn't have any house or shop near the place. The statement presented before the trial court was to look into any suspicion that the statement was unlawful, the second witness of the prosecution was from the complainant and his statement was made before the trial court, He also didn't know much about this place. All three witnesses, presented by the prosecution witness, failed completely to encourage the trust, the ocular account presented by the prosecution failed to obtain any autonomy or support, the 8 mm rifle. The recovery date was the same, with the date of handing over the vacancy of the crime to the probable officer of the relevant police station Mohair. advocate from Kacha Khooh lawyer