Find a Lawyer

GHULAM QASIM versus STATE

Section 2302/34 34 Definition of Proof Contradicting medical evidence from the Akulon account The trial court sentenced the defendants to death and sentenced them to death for extradition. No one had witnessed the incident and that the FIR was recorded late. Medical evidence has revealed that the victim suffered three injuries to his person, two of them were caused by a sharp weapon while the third was caused by a firearm but was injured by sharp wounds. Edge weapons were not mentioned in the FIR, leading to the conclusion that injuries caused by sharp weapons were mentioned in the complainant's supplementary statement. Cannot be equated with In the present case, the complainant's supplementary statement to include the number of cases or accused has not been proved even after the recorded investigating officer inspected the adjournment motion because there are contradictions in the statements of witnesses regarding the harvest season. The appellant / allegedly misbehaved. Witnesses said the suspect escaped on the spot with H. Bounce and gun but both arms were recovered from the chauffeurs of the deceased. No independent witness to recover the weapons was presented by the prosecutor, who had been on the scene before the gun was recovered. They were not sent to the forensic science laboratory, but were sent to the laboratory immediately. After his recovery, it was not mentioned in the FIR with the gun that the accused was holding a double-barrel gun, the FIR was never mentioned in the hatchet fact. best advocate from Peshawar lawyer