Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD AZEEM ALIAS JEEJA versus STATE

Section 302 (b) and 34 law evidence (10 of 1984), Article 47 Evidence of testimony with the complainant's wife, two co-accused, with theft, committed the murder of the accused's son, in the FIR It was alleged that the deceased had exposed the accused / appellant in front of the arbitrators regarding the beating of his (accused's) wife. In a domestic dispute, the trial court acquitted the accused and sentenced the accused to death. The accused claimed that he was involved in the case because of political enmity. That the prosecution's witnesses were acquitted and dismissed from the charges. That the prosecution failed to prove a motive. The delay was sent to the Chemical Examiner because the blood-stained theft was not credible and no evidence was found of the accused's motive during the trial. The real witness, the real brother of the deceased and a The neighbor did not want any previous hostility or illegality against the accused as he was involved in a false case, the witnesses' statements were very permanent, coherent, natural, and reliable accounts of the incident, and from the complainant's statement Acknowledged and confirmed though the record was recorded in the absence of the accused Such a statement was subjected to cross-examination by a single acquitted accused and was regularly transmitted to the record of the present case and this law was relevant under Article 47 of the Constitution Martyrdom, 1984, because the accused / The complainant had already died before the appellant filed his statement against the motorway. lawer from fb area from Matli lawyer