Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD RAHEEM ALIAS ABDUL RAHEEM versus STATE

Although the evidence of the prosecution's testimony in the appreciation of the evidence in Articles 2 and 24 of the Contempt Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 391 and 395 was plausible, it had many flaws in its face and its credibility was severe on the prosecution's witnesses. Suspicions were born, Wardak took place at ten o'clock at night, seven suspects, including appellant, were masked and armed, they stopped the tractor at the gunpoint and snatched the key and all four of them. Snatched the tractor, such a story was not credible. First, how can two prosecution witnesses argue with seven armed men? Secondly, how could these two unarmed men empower the seven armed robbers to expose them, while they were not harmed? Third, at night in a rural area, how can they see so clearly and for so long, so that they can identify the accused after about two to two years after the Wardak. Finally, it was also admitted that the identity of the accused was not paraded, the appeal was allowed, the directions of the release of the charges were stayed by the Federal Shariat Court. online advocate from Parachinar lawyer