ATTA-UR-REHMAN ALIAS IBRAHIM ALIAS UMAR ALIAS TAHIR versus STATE
Sections 302 (b), 337F (iii), (v), (vi) and 34 of the Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), Section 9 (a) (c) (d) (h) The Explosives Act ( VI of 1908), Section QQ murder of noble, detainee, Hashima, Manqila, Joint Intent, Terrorist spree and explosions did not result in delay in hours of filing of FIR in hate crime, special As the designated accused were not mentioned in the properly-defined FIR of the delay, the complainant could not be charged with any untoward incident, the eyewitnesses who were injured in the incident referred to the prosecution's case. Full support The accomplices of the suspects opened indiscriminate firing on the Rangers Force, with automatic weapons and used hand grenades, which killed two people, witnessing the testimony of witnesses injured in such terrorist incidents. Was to be held in high rank, as the injured witness would not, in any case, substitute the wrong assailant for the original attacker. The incident, the previous hostility with the accused persons was the time of day and all witnesses saw the accused at the relevant time clearly that the prosecution witnesses raised both the accused in the identification parade, and held the identification parade. I didn't want to delay them in the trial court. Let the prosecution prove fatal, when witnesses of the incident had clearly identified that the accused appearing in the court were the same, then the evidence of the Rangers personnel could not be denied, simply because they were armed forces. The eye witnesses were natural and independent, the evidence was completely linked to the medical evidence.
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2013
