Find a Lawyer

UMAR HAYAT versus STATE

Section 302 (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 185 (3) Re-review of the evidence The joint responsibility of the accused and the co-accused was the rule of preparation of the grain from the imposition of chaff against the accused / applicant. Committed the murder of the accused along with The trial court dismissed the appeal filed by the accused against the trial court's finding, after acquiring the co-accused, with the firearm shots, after convicting and sentencing the accused to death. That the evidence of the prosecution was indispensable. It was an unseen event that happened at night. The prosecution's witnesses were interesting witnesses and the defendant was injured as a result of the firing of the two accused, therefore, the possibility of a fatal injury by the acquiring partner was not ruled out and the accused / applicant in this case. The matter could not be dismissed. The participant was equal to the accused, so he deserved the same benefit as the validation of the acquittal partner should not be suspected of claiming the presence of witnesses with the deceased in his home, claiming that this was an unlawful incident. The deputation of the witnesses was sufficiently consistent, truthful and reliable, and it was sufficient to maintain the conviction of the accused as well as the characteristics of the accused / applicant being distinguished from the accompanying accused, as the latter played the main role of injuring the accused. Was pronounced but the suspect was assigned to cause firearm injuries to sensitive hands. The part of the victim's body that proved fatal to his life was prosecuted by the prosecution, bringing direct evidence to the record court, in the case of joint liability. famous supreme court advocate from Gojra lawyer