Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YASEEN versus STATE

Section 7 (h) Prevention of Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Rule 427/149 immediately eliminated the possibility of fraud or false implications The credible account of the incident provided the time, location and manner of the incident. Was also established. The fear arising out of this was that the eyewitnesses assisted each other in every case, which had no enmity with the accused, and they correctly identified the accused in the trial court on the same evidence. This may have been because Maximus in Omnibus had been withdrawn from the Omnibus since then, and now the grain has to be strained in each case according to the circumstances. The rule that the integrity of the witness was irrevocable cannot be accepted as a universal plea that the evidence obtained by the police from the accused was reliable, that, like the other witnesses, the authorities were reliable and that they were good witnesses of terrorism and Fear was fully supported by ocular testimony. After the pleasures of the accused in the area, no one could be willing to come forward to take part in the independent witness recovery process. The investigation in this case was honest and transparent. The decisions reached by the trial court were not arbitrary, perverse or against the law. The accused were kept in stable condition how to become a advocate from Dir lawyer