Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD RAMZAN versus STATE

Section 302 (b) evidence was appreciated in the dark night and no one saw it, neither the accused's name was listed in the FIR, nor any suspicion was made against any person. Neither his accomplices nor his accomplices were included. During the course of the investigation, the prosecution's case was merely used on circumstantial evidence. The trial's motive for the murder was rightly denied, the key features of the trial were disputed by medical evidence, with the delay in filing the FIR more than two hours after the prosecution's version Detection was predicted. The incident happened in the dark of night, the suspect's identity was open to serious doubt. The statements of Wajitkar's witnesses were untrustworthy, which included many weaknesses, and it appears that the FIR made the mistake of naming the accused. The cover was artificially fabricated. Extra-judicial confession was always treated with humiliation and was not given an M. The story presented to the witnesses of the extra-judicial confession was hollow, as the accused had no reason to approach them for confession. Who had no authority to assist the accused in any way, was said to have been denied the co-accused yet. The trial court prosecution failed to explain why the empty cartridge recovered prior to the arrest of the accused was not sent to the firearms specialist on the same day as the possibility of retrieving the gun and sending the empty cartridge after the gun was fired. top civil advocates from Ukba lawyer