Find a Lawyer

ALLAH DITTA versus STATE

The benefits of Sections 2302 (b) and 9449 were not presented to the trial witness in the FIR during the trial; eye witnesses, including the complainant, mistrusted their statements before the trial court. To indicate their presence. The roof of a house from where they could see the incident occurred at odd hours of the night, the presence of the prosecution witnesses was not explained on the roof of the house on the night of the incident, nor did the compound evacuate or the victim was killed. Twelve people were included in the FIR outside the complainant's house, of whom ten were named, two of whom were acquitted by the accused, followed by the evidence of the complainant. Quality can be judged by their aforementioned behaviors. Any role assigned to the accused was similar to the role assigned to the two co-accused, who had already been acquitted by the trial court Medical Ave. Dennis could only ascertain the cause of the death and did not encourage the assailants, although this did not prove from the best available evidence compiled in the FIR, which was otherwise three years old and led the accused to fire. There was nothing in the middle of the recovery. The delay of 3/2 hour in filing of the FIR did not result in any legal consequences for the absence of recovery of the crime, and the counsel was acquitted on the benefit of the doubt in the circumstances. immigration advocates phone number from Raiwind lawyer