Find a Lawyer

SOONHARO versus STATE

Section 561 A Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Sections 302, 148 and 149 Order reduction, petitioner challenged by the trial court that it was refused for the fourth time without examining eyewitnesses, However, they were examined three times before, three times and each time they removed all the attackers' faces which caused them to identify any of the witnesses repeatedly. There is no benefit to checking it. This would be the cause for most witnesses in this case to be upset and they should not have to worry repeatedly when once they said they did not identify an attacker, it was not expected that they would The position will change. It will not make much difference for an accused and will simply expose him to a fictitious crime; he cannot be charged on the basis of the evidence of a witness who has testified before a trial court state attorney. The statement had apologized to her. The purpose of examining witnesses for the fourth time will be presented, in the case of allowing the applicants, they were acquitted law websites from Gojra lawyer