Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AZEEM versus STATE

Section 497 (2) of the Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Sections 302 and 392 bail, grant of further investigation FIR, shows that the perpetrators of the alleged crimes could not be identified and identified on the spot. Was not nominated to the FIR in any capacity. For the first time in this case, whoever and his name appeared on the plaintiff failed to disclose or disclose his statement through the supplemental statement given by the complainant that he was involved in the alleged crime Was the source of knowledge. In the decree against the evidence of the trial, there was no parade of test identification in the case which resulted in the accused petitioner allegedly admitting his crime to the police during his arrest, but made such a confession. The clear price was not reportedly recovered from the pistol after that. The case was not protected from the physical confinement of the accused and there was no record for linking the recovered pistol. The alleged investigation was already finalized and the report submitted under section 1773 was followed. Yesterday, the CCP revealed that the accused had not been charged with shooting at the victim during the investigation. The Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000 and against it was ordered to present a challan in a commission court in which the accused had no prior evidence of being a thief, robber or robber before the present criminal case was filed. ? Further investigation into his crime in the scope of Section 497, sub-section (2) of the PCP, he was admitted to bail, under circumstances when you need a advocate from Jampur lawyer