Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SALEEM versus STATE

Section 302 (b) Testimony of Evidence The benefit of the doubt was a deep connection between the two witnesses, and my relationship with the witnesses with the deceased was not sufficient to refute their evidence and declare them as interested witnesses. There should be no enmity between the parties. The trigger for this incident was the revelation of hostility between the parties as the parties could be termed interesting witnesses because of the previous enmity between the witnesses, there is no doubt that their conviction could be relied upon to record. If the defendants said that the witnesses would convince the court that they had witnessed the incident and they had spoken in full with the fact that their statements were proved by some independent piece of evidence, the incident would have been dead. Was not located near the home or residence of. Or witness, but took place in the field contradicting statements Medical evidence claims that contradicting the claim that the accused put a gun to his body and fired at the victim, which contradicted medical evidence and site planning. Was. The statements of the two witnesses regarding the role of the accused were not available on the record to confirm the statements of the witnesses who were otherwise interested in the post-mortem of the victim, which resulted in the immediate FIR. R was not recorded. There is no denying that the police were not prepared to produce the papers before the doctor and that time was spent to tell the story and to introduce the deceased's close relatives as witnesses. Cannot be used as a controversial piece of evidence. Just because of that lawer from fb area from Nowshera Cantt lawyer