Find a Lawyer

AHMED SULTAN AND ANOTHER versus STATE

According to the section 302/34 Criminal Code (v. 1898), section 397 sentencing, the request for a direction to run, according to the confessional statements of the accused, the motive for the three murders was the same and the crime was the same. But the killing of one victim was at a different location from where the other two slaughters were strangled. The incident took place in two different police stations, so the two cases were tried separately, though the verdict was announced on the same day that a person was sentenced to prison for various crimes. , As provided under Section 3939 Cr, CRPC, but with the trial court, the sentence of imprisonment was ordered to run concurrently. Separate cases Unless such conviction is exercised in favor of the accused, these sentences run continuously, neither the trial court, the High Court or even the Supreme Court in the petition for leave of appeal. Used the above discretion in favor of individuals. Otherwise, even at best, such discretion to instruct Jammu to run was not used in his favor, keeping in view the brutal murder of three persons for a small fat item carried by the accused. Accordingly, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal. when you need a advocate from Lakimarwat lawyer