Find a Lawyer

NIAMATULLAH versus STATE

Defendant's counsel, who had appreciated the evidence in Sections 302 and 304 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (V 1898), sections 342 and 364 of the Law Evidence (10 of 1984), Article 17, argued that the trial proceeded with section 342, C.R. Recorded the statement of the accused under the act. To record a PC and instead a certificate in your hand, sign a typed certificate that violates Section 6464, CRPC's mandatory supply. And so after filing the latest statement under section 342, there was a proper case on the trial court's remand for writing a fresh verdict, the PC statement under section 342 was registered under the CRPC accused and the accused And was signed by the trial court, which had the required certificate below. Section 646464, CCP was typed and it was signed by the trial court, stating that the object was not taken at the trial stage, the lawyer also to identify any injustice or injury. Was unsuccessful. On the basis that the certificate was not written in the hands of the trial court, the absence of any wrongdoing by the accused was not convinced that the accused's lawyer failed to cite the law of any case that the trial court had documented Recording is required and the typed certificate signing was an illegal one that was not treatable. In the absence of any injustice to the accused that does not equate to failing the trial. However, the court did not mention in the judgment while convicting the accused under Section 230 PP, PPC, under which clause 303030, the trial court convicted the PPC accused. , P. jobs for advocates from Kashmir lawyer