Find a Lawyer

GHULAM RASOOL versus STATE

Eye witnesses were not present at the scene of appreciation of the section 302 (b), 324 and 353 Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 7 West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), Section 13 (e) and They were about 1000 1000. The incident happened at night, but no evidence was available about the presence of an electric bulb at the site of the accident. The complainant had improved the trial, ocular evidence did not affect the testimony. The victim was not seen firing on the delayed charge. Twelve days to record the statements of the prosecution witnesses who were all police personnel under Section 161, CR PC and the delay of one month and eleven days in sending the recovered articles to the ballistic expert was not explained by the Medical The evidence did not support molecular evidence. When the molecular evidence was untrustworthy and doubtful, the remaining evidence cannot substantiate the crime nce the accused was acquitted in circumstances. jobs for fresh advocates from Alipur lawyer