Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD IMRAN versus STATE

In view of the value of the section 302 (b) evidence, the expert's report negatively negated the prosecution's case and the medical evidence did not confirm the ocular version in which the three accomplices were acquitted. Complainant had no complaints and needed independent support to maintain or support. There was a very short sentence of conviction in which the accused's declaration of guilt was not enough to maintain his conviction when the ocular account was not supported by medical evidence, when witnesses, the real father And the testimony of the deceased's real uncle was dropped. Since he was not present on the spot he did not see the incident, the motive for the incident was not proved on record as the complainant admittedly did not present any evidence of this effect during the investigation. The prosecution's case was full of suspicions from the complaining party. Protection of the accused was not maintained on the basis of incriminating evidence and the accused was acquitted while passing through inaccessible sources. solicitors from Mangowal lawyer